Correct option is B
Section 81 of the Indian Penal Code allows for the defense of "necessity," meaning that an act that would otherwise be a crime may be excused if it was done to prevent greater harm. However, this defense cannot be invoked when the act results in harm to an innocent person, even if the accused believed it was necessary for their own protection.
Option (b) - "Prevention of harm to the accused at the expense of an innocent person" - cannot be used as a defense under Section 81. This is because the law does not permit an individual to cause harm to an innocent party to save themselves, as it contradicts the principle of justice and equity. The necessity defense is intended to prevent harm, not to justify the sacrifice of an innocent person for the accused's benefit.
Information Booster: The defense of necessity under Section 81 IPC is based on the legal maxim "necessitas non habet legem," which means necessity knows no law. This defense applies when an act is done in good faith to avoid a greater harm or evil. However, this defense has limits, particularly when the act harms an innocent person. The law aims to balance the interests of society by ensuring that individuals cannot claim necessity as a defense when their actions unjustly harm others.
Additional Knowledge:
·
Self-Defence (a): Acts done in self-defense are often considered necessary and are protected under the law, provided the force used is proportionate to the threat faced.
·
Self-Preservation (c): This is generally a valid ground for invoking necessity, but not when it harms an innocent person.
·
Choice of Evils (d): The defense of necessity involves choosing the lesser of two evils, but it must not involve harming an innocent person, as this violates legal and moral principles.
