Right Of Private Defence Essay

As a general idea, the right of private defence allows human beings to use defensive force which otherwise would be illegal, to fend off attacks threatening certain important interests of the person concerned. Similar to the defence of necessity, the right of private defence permits individuals to take the law into their own hands.

Jeremy Bentham, an English jurist, once said, “This right of defence is absolutely necessary. The vigilance of the Magistrates can never make up for vigilance of each individual on his own behalf. The fear of the law can never restrain bad men so effectually as the fear of the sum total to individual resistance. Take away this right and you become, in so doing, the accomplice of all bad men. ”

The question in this issue to be considered is the alleged exercise of right of private defence. Sec 96 provides that nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. However, this section does not define the expression ‘right of private defence.’ It is merely indicative of the fact that nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of such right. Whether in a particular scenario, a person legitimately and in good faith acted in the exercise of such right of private defence

According to the law, the right commences the moment a reasonable apprehension of danger to the private of a person (body) arises from a threat, or an attempt, although the offence may not actually have been committed. The right lasts only as long as the apprehension of danger to the body continues; which should also be reasonable. The Court observed it Jai Dev v State of Punjab that as soon as the cause for reasonable apprehension vanished and the threat had either been destroyed or had been put to rest, there could be no ground to exercise the said right of private