CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Directions: Read the following passage and an...
Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.
Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.
Infancy - Sections 82 and 83
Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.
Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.
Infancy - Sections 82 and 83
Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.
[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]
Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?
- a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.
- b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a person's actions.
- c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.
- d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a person's actions.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
| FREE This question is part of | Download PDF Attempt this Test |
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General...
Understanding the Legal Concept
The phrase "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" embodies a fundamental principle in criminal law regarding the nature of ignorance in relation to legal liability.
Key Points of the Principle
- Ignorance of Facts Excuses:
- This part of the maxim indicates that if a person commits an act under a genuine misunderstanding of the facts, they may be excused from liability. For instance, if someone unknowingly takes someone else's property believing it to be theirs, they may not be held criminally responsible.
- Ignorance of the Law Does Not Excuse:
- Conversely, this portion emphasizes that a lack of knowledge about the law does not absolve a person from liability. For instance, claiming ignorance of a law prohibiting theft would not protect an individual from prosecution if they stole something.
Application in Legal Context
- Section 76 and 79 of IPC:
- These sections reflect the principle by allowing for defense in cases where a person acts under a mistake of fact, thus recognizing that genuine misunderstandings can lead to unintentional wrongdoing.
- Rationale:
- The rationale behind this distinction is that laws are meant to be known by the public, and individuals are expected to be aware of legal norms and standards. This promotes accountability and ensures that individuals take responsibility for their actions.
Conclusion
In summary, option 'A' accurately captures the essence of the maxim. Ignorance of factual circumstances may provide a defense in legal situations, while ignorance of legal rules and regulations will not excuse an individual from legal responsibility.
The phrase "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" embodies a fundamental principle in criminal law regarding the nature of ignorance in relation to legal liability.
Key Points of the Principle
- Ignorance of Facts Excuses:
- This part of the maxim indicates that if a person commits an act under a genuine misunderstanding of the facts, they may be excused from liability. For instance, if someone unknowingly takes someone else's property believing it to be theirs, they may not be held criminally responsible.
- Ignorance of the Law Does Not Excuse:
- Conversely, this portion emphasizes that a lack of knowledge about the law does not absolve a person from liability. For instance, claiming ignorance of a law prohibiting theft would not protect an individual from prosecution if they stole something.
Application in Legal Context
- Section 76 and 79 of IPC:
- These sections reflect the principle by allowing for defense in cases where a person acts under a mistake of fact, thus recognizing that genuine misunderstandings can lead to unintentional wrongdoing.
- Rationale:
- The rationale behind this distinction is that laws are meant to be known by the public, and individuals are expected to be aware of legal norms and standards. This promotes accountability and ensures that individuals take responsibility for their actions.
Conclusion
In summary, option 'A' accurately captures the essence of the maxim. Ignorance of factual circumstances may provide a defense in legal situations, while ignorance of legal rules and regulations will not excuse an individual from legal responsibility.
Free Test
FREE
| Start Free Test |
Community Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General...
The statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" translates to "ignorance of the fact excuses, ignorance of the law does not excuse." This legal maxim is a fundamental principle in many legal systems, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It means that if someone is unaware of certain facts or circumstances related to their actions and commits an offense, they may be excused from liability because they did not have the necessary knowledge or intent regarding those facts. However, ignorance of the law itself is generally not considered a valid excuse for committing an offense. In other words, individuals are expected to be aware of the laws that apply to their actions, and claiming ignorance of the law is usually not a valid defense in criminal cases.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Top Courses for CLATView all
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.General Exceptions: Under Section 76 of the IPC, an act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or by reason of a mistake of fact, not by mistake of law in good faith believes himself, to be, bound by law to do such act. It is derived from the legal maxim ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat.Under Section 79, act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included. Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of mistake of fact and not mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing that particular act. Accident under Section 80, includes an accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.Infancy - Sections 82 and 83Section 82 includes an act of a child below seven years of age. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Suppose a child below seven years of age, pressed the trigger of the gun and caused the death of his father then, the child will not be liable. Section 83 includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and repercussions of his conduct during that occasion. For example, suppose a child of 10 years killed his father with a gun in the shadow of immaturity, he will not be liable if he has not attained maturity. Insanity under Section 84, is an Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.[Source: Extracted with edits and revisions from General Exceptions under the IPC, https://blog.ipleaders.in/general-exception-under-ipc/]Q. What is the legal concept behind the statement "ignorantia facti doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat" mentioned in the passage?a)Ignorance of facts excuses, but ignorance of the law does not.b)Ignorance of facts and the law both excuse a persons actions.c)Ignorance of the law excuses, but ignorance of facts does not.d)Neither ignorance of facts nor the law excuses a persons actions.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
|
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Suggested Free Tests
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup