Question

A issued a warrant to a police officer to arrest P. But the officer arrests Q after the due inquiry believing Q to be P. Here

• A. P is liable for criminal negligence
• B. P has committed no offence by virtue of S.76 IPC
• C. P has committed an offence of wrongful confinement
• D. None of these.

Hint:

Be wary of questions in competitive exams that seem to have typos or are confusingly worded. Analyze the legal position of each party mentioned in the facts first. If the options provided do not match the correct legal analysis (as is the case here for party 'P'), "None of the above" is often the intended correct answer.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question describes a scenario where a police officer, acting under a warrant to arrest P, mistakenly arrests Q. The question then asks about the liability of P. The structure of the question and options appears to be flawed or intended to be tricky. Let's analyze the liability of each party.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
1. Liability of the Police Officer: The police officer acted under a warrant, which is a legal command. He arrested Q instead of P due to a mistake of fact ("believing Q to be P") and did so in good faith ("after due inquiry"). Under Section 76 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), "Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is... by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith believes himself to be, bound by law to do it." Therefore, the police officer has committed no offence.
2. Liability of P: P is the person who was supposed to be arrested. He has done nothing in the entire scenario. He is merely the subject of a warrant. He cannot be held liable for criminal negligence, wrongful confinement, or any other offence based on these facts.
3. Analyzing the Options: - (A) P is liable for criminal negligence: Incorrect. P has done nothing. - (B) P has committed no offence by virtue of S.76 IPC: Incorrect. Section 76 is a defense available to the officer, not a provision defining an offence or lack thereof for P. P has committed no offence, but not because of Section 76. - (C) P has committed an offence of wrongful confinement: Incorrect. P has not confined anyone.
Since none of the options correctly describe the legal situation regarding P, the most appropriate answer is that none of the given statements are correct.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The correct answer is None of these.