Question

You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct
answers. Assertion (A): X, because of unsound state of mind and not
knowing the nature of the act, attacks Y, who in self defense and in order
to ward off the attack, hits him thereby injuring him. Y has not committed
an offence. Reason (R): Y had a right of private defense against X under
Section 98 of the Indian Penal Code.
Both A and Rare Individually true and R is the correct explanation of A
Both A and R are individually true but is not the correct explanation of A
Als true but R is false
Als false but R is true​

Answer 1

Answer:

According to the section 98 of the Indian penal code when an act, which would otherwise be a certain offence , is not that offence, by reaction of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind o the intoxication of the person doing that act, or by reason of any misconception on the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defence against that act which he would have if the act were that offence. This problem is based on illustration (a) of sec.98 of IPC. The right of private defence does not depend upon the actual criminality of the aggressor but on the wrongful character of the act attempted

SO THE CORRECT ANS IS OPTION A.BOTH A ND R ARE CORRECT AND R IS THE CORRECT EXPLANATION OF A.