About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

24 Supremo Amicus [1] (2021)

handle is hein.journals/supami24 and id is 1 raw text is: SUPREMO AMICUS

VOLUME 24

ISSN 2456-9704

PERCEPTIVE ANALYSI
CONCEPT OF GOOD FAI
RESPECT TO SECTION 7
THE LIGHT OF STATE OF
RAM BAHADUR TH
By Vidhi Gupta
From Maharaja Agrasen
Management Studies, Rohini

S OF THE
TH WITH
9 IPC - IN

of good faith and the parameters that define
it.

ORISSA v.        Brief Facts
APA               Jagat   Bandhu    Chatterjee  came    to
Rasgovindpur in Orissa with his Nepali
servant, Ram Bahadur Thapa for purchasing
Institute  of     an aeroscrape located there.

CITATION        AIR   1960 Ori 161,
1960 CriLJ 1349
NAME        OF High Court of Orissa
THE COURT
BENCH           Justice R Narasimhan
and Justice S Barman
DATE        OF  09th November 1959
DECISION
RELEVANT        Section  79, Section
ACTS/           302,   Section  326,
SECTIONS        Section  324 of the
Indian  Penal Code,
1860
INTRODUCTION
The concept of Mistake of Fact under the law
has been accepted by various legislations
worldwide. Various jurists have inferred
different understanding of this law and have
tried to analyse the subjective or objective
applicability of the concept of good faith in
the Indian Jurisprudence. The present case of
Ram Bahadur Thapa elucidates the concept
'State of Orissa v. Ram Bahadur Thapa, AIR 1960
Ori 161: 1960 Cr LJ 1349

Around midnight of May 20th 1958, to
corroborate the belief of the village locals
with respect to the presence of ghosts on
specific nights in a week in an area near a
deserted aerodrome in the village, the
Respondent, Ram Bahadur Thapa along with
his employer Mr Jagat Bandhu Chatterjee
and their landlord Krishna Chandra Patro had
visited the aerodrome area in the village of
Rasgovindpur in Orissa.
Upon reaching the location, all of the three
above-named people saw something similar
to a ghost in flickering light and the
Respondent haphazardly attacked the figures
with his khurki.
Eventually, it was discovered that the figures
at whom the Respondent attacked were
women of a nearby village who were out to
collect the mohua flowers during midnight
using a hurricane lantern.
The act of the Respondent led to the death of
Gelhi Majhiani and caused grievous injuries
to Ganga Majhiani and Saunri Majhiani. The
landlord, Krishna Chandra Patro also got
injured during this attack.
The Respondent was charged under Section
302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for
causing the Murder2 of Gelhi Majhiani, under
2The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860) s. 300

www.supremoamicus.org

PIF 6.242

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most