R was working with an axe, exercising due care and caution. Suddenly the head of the axe flew and killed a man standing nearby. Which one of the following is the correct legal position in this case?

Correct option is D

The correct option remains (d) R would not be guilty of any offence.

Explanation

This scenario is the classic legal illustration for the defense of Accident. Under Section 18 of the BNS, 2023 (which corresponds to Section 80 of the old IPC), nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, provided the following conditions are met:

1. No Criminal Intent: The act must be done without any intention or knowledge of causing harm.
2. Lawful Act/Manner: The person must be doing a lawful act, in a lawful manner, by lawful means.
3. Due Care and Caution: The person must have exercised proper care.

In this case, since the facts explicitly state that R was "exercising due care and caution," the death is treated as a "misfortune" rather than a crime. The law does not punish a person for a purely accidental outcome where no negligence or bad intention was involved.

Information Booster

• The "Axe" Illustration: This specific example is actually the official illustration provided within the statute itself (historically in IPC Section 80 and retained in the spirit of BNS).
• The Burden of Proof: Under the Indian Evidence Act (now the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), the burden of proving that the case falls under a General Exception lies on the accused. R would have to show that he was indeed being careful.
• Inevitability: For Section 18 to apply, the event must be "out of the ordinary." If the axe head was visibly loose and R ignored it, the defense of accident would fail because "due care" would be missing.