Code:
The right of private defence of property extends, under the restrictions mentioned in section 99, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the wrong-doer, if the offence, the committing of which, or the attempting to commit which, occasions the exercise of the right, be an offence of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:–
First.–Robbery;
Secondly.– House-breaking by night;
Thirdly.Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property;
Fourthly.–Theft, mischief, or house-trespass, under such circumstances as may reasonably cause apprehension that death or grievous hurt will be the consequence, if such right of private defence is not exercised.
STATE AMENDMENTS
Karnataka
(1) In section 103, in clause Thirdly, —
(i) after the words “mischief by fire”, the words “or any explosive substance” Shall be inserted;
(ii) after the words “as a human dwelling, or” the words “as a place of worship, or” shall be inserted.
(2) After clause Fourthly, the following clause shall be inserted, namely:–
“Fifthly.— Mischief by fire or any explosive substance committed on any property used or intended to be used for the purpose of Government or any local authority, statutory body or company owned or controlled by Government or railway or any vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward”.
[Vide Karnataka Act 8 of 1972, sec. 2].
Explanation:
This section covers situations where a person uses force to protect their property from harm or theft. The law allows for the use of reasonable force to defend property, but it emphasizes that the force used must be proportionate to the threat posed to the property.
Key points:
- Right of Private Defence: Individuals have a legal right to defend their property.
- Proportionality: The force used in defence must be proportionate to the threat to the property. Excessive force that results in death may be considered an offence.
- Threat to Property: The threat must be real and imminent. This section does not apply if the threat is past or hypothetical.
Illustration:
Imagine a homeowner discovering a burglar attempting to steal their valuables. In this case, the homeowner has the right to use force to prevent the theft. If the homeowner uses reasonable force to apprehend the burglar, such as grabbing their arm or using pepper spray, it would likely be justified under this section. However, if the homeowner shoots the burglar, resulting in their death, it is highly likely that the use of force was disproportionate, and the homeowner could face criminal charges.
Common Questions and Answers:
Q: Can I use lethal force to protect my property from theft?
A: Generally, no. Using lethal force is only justified in exceptional circumstances when there is a genuine threat of death or grievous bodily harm to the person defending their property or another person.
Q: What if the burglar threatens me with a weapon?
A: If your life or safety is in immediate danger, you may have grounds to use lethal force. However, the use of such force must still be proportionate to the threat.
Q: What if I am not present when the theft occurs but my property is stolen?
A: This section does not cover the use of force after the theft has occurred. If you discover your property has been stolen, you should report it to the police.
