Correct option is B
The correct matching is as follows:
·
A. Insanity as a defence -
2. R. Vs. McNaughten
·
B. Common intention -
1. Barendra Kumar Ghosh Vs. Emperor
·
C. Necessity -
4. R. Vs. Dudley and Stephen
·
D. Private defence -
3. Vishwanath Vs. State of U.P.
Explanation:
1.
Insanity as a defence (A): The case of
R. Vs. McNaughten (2) is a landmark case that established the McNaughten rules, which are used to determine whether a defendant can be deemed not guilty by reason of insanity.
2.
Common intention (B): The case of
Barendra Kumar Ghosh Vs. Emperor (1) is significant for interpreting Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.
3.
Necessity (C): The case of
R. Vs. Dudley and Stephen (4) is a classic example in criminal law illustrating the defense of necessity.
4.
Private defence (D): The case of
Vishwanath Vs. State of U.P. (3) deals with the right of private defense.
