Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/62764
Type: Journal article
Title: Sudden fight, consent and the principle of comparative responsibility in the Indian penal code
Author: Leader-Elliott, I.
Citation: Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, 2010; 2010:282-303
Publisher: Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
Issue Date: 2010
ISSN: 0218-2173
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Ian Leader-Elliott
Abstract: Sudden fight is one of four partial defences to murder in the Indian Penal Code. It was a late addition which lacks the qualifying provisos and illustrations that constrain applications of the partial defences of provocation and excessive force in private defence. A survey of recent decisions of the Indian Supreme Court suggests that sudden fight has the potential to subvert the principled limits that constrain the other partial defences. Sudden fight has no equivalent in other Commonwealth jurisdictions. It can be argued that it is an anachronism that should be eliminated from the law of murder. This essay argues in favour of its retention. The partial defences of provocation, excessive defence, sudden fight and consent are unified by an underlying principle of comparative responsibility that extenuates murder when the offender was seriously wronged by the victim or acted with the consent of the victim to die or engage in an activity that was likely to result in death. A set of provisos and illustrations is proposed that will constrain applications of the partial defence of sudden fight in conformity with the principle of comparative responsibility.
Rights: Copyright status unknown
RMID: 0020102503
Published version: http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=729519071849406;res=IELHSS
Appears in Collections:Law publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.