IPC Section 311 - Punishment
.jpg)
Date : 08 Apr, 2022
Post By Vishal Kumar
Section 130- Aiding escape of, rescuing or harbouring such prisoner.—Whoever knowingly aids or assists any State prisoner or prisoner of war in escaping from lawful custody, or rescues or attempts to rescue any such prisoner, or harbours or conceals any such prisoner who has escaped from lawful custody, or offers or attempts to offer any resistance to the recapture of such prisoner, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.—A State prisoner or prisoner of war, who is permitted to be at large on his parole within certain limits in 2[India], is said to escape from lawful custody if he goes beyond the limits within which he is allowed to be at large.
INTRODUCTION Chapter 6 of the Indian Penal Code deals with offences against the state. This chapter includes sections 121 to section 130. The objective of this chapter is to recognize and punish the offences against the state. It is intended to keep a state safe from such offences mentioned in this chapter. The offences under this chapter attract rigorous punishments such as the death penalty and life imprisonment. These offences are directed against the state’s peace and tranquillity and should be punished rigorously to deter other people from targeting states. BASIC FEATURES OF SECTION 130 Section 128 talks about the escape of a prisoner from police custody with the aid of a public servant. Section 129 talks about the escape of a prisoner from police custody by the negligence of a public servant. Section 130 goes a step ahead and includes the aid of a common person to the state prisoner. The term ‘whoever’ in this section covers everyone but the public servants because the liability of the public servants has already been established under the previous sections. This section is more extensive than the preceding sections. The offence under this section is cognizable (arrest without warrant) and non-bailable (bail not given) in nature. The offence in this section is non-compoundable (which means that no compromise can be attained) and is triable by the court of sessions. INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 130 The accused has to knowingly help the prisoner in escaping the lawful custody of the state. The prisoner who is escaping has to be in the lawful custody of the state. The requirement of the intention of helping the prisoner in escaping is mandatory for invoking this section. The punishment under this section extends to 10 years or more and in some cases, it can also extend to life imprisonment.
As already mentioned, this section is not limited to public servants and applies to every citizen of the country. The word ‘knowingly’ in this section caters to the requirements of mens rea which is important while invoking this section. Mens rea refers to the intention of committing a crime. Hence, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that intention was present when the accused helped the state prisoner in escaping. If the prosecution is not able to establish mens rea, the accused cannot be convicted under this section. According to the explanation in this section, if a state prisoner is allowed to move freely within a specified jurisdiction on parole, he cannot cross the limits of that jurisdiction. If he does that, he will be said to have committed the offence of escaping the lawful custody of the state. The scope and ambit of this section are very wide. The offences of harbouring or concealing the accused, helping the prisoner escape, and rescuing the prisoner are all included and made punishable under this section. The motive of including so many aspects of an offence under a single section could be to widen the ambit and cover all kinds of escape attempts owing to the seriousness of the offence. An offence under this section is of a serious gravity and requires rigorous sentences regarding the same RELEVANT CASE LAWS Commissioner of Police and Anr vs. Mehar Singh- Apart from adjudicating other main uses of the case, an additional pointer that the court stated, in this case, was that if a case against an accused has been withdrawn by the State government under any of the sections under chapter six of Indian penal code, then the accused is fit for applying to government services. Mohd. Waris @ Raza vs. State- the point of contention was whether the court can take cognizance of an offence under chapter 6 without a prior sanction of the state or central government as required under section 196 of CrPC. The court in this case held that the sanction is required under section 196 of CrPC only when the court goes into the merits of the case. In this particular case, the court did not go into the merits of the case at hand and therefore, no prior sanction is needed. WHY LAWTENDO Lawtendo is a platform for you to help in hiring legal counsel. We work twenty-four hours to provide the best lawyers who suit the needs of the customers. We work with a wide range of lawyers whose areas of expertise range from divorce, court marriage, and registration, property possession delay, cheque, and money recovery; to will drafting and agreement, employment issues, and builder disputes. In addition to this, we also deal with cases of wrongful dishonour of cheques. Lawtendo is a hassle-free platform that works rigorously to make sure the best lawyer reaches their client in time. Written by Tarushi Goel, a fifth-year law student of O.P Jindal Global University. She is currently pursuing BA LLB and is inclined toward legal research.
Prabhu Razdan