1,498
26
Essay, 1 pages (200 words)

I) iv) that the omission was negligent or

i) That the accused was pulling down or repairing a building; ii) That he omitted to take such order with the building as was sufficient to guard against probable danger from the fall of building or any part thereof; iii) That the probable danger was to human life; iv) That the omission was negligent or with a knowledge of such probable danger. Section 288 could only be brought into requisition in a case where the building is situating in a populated neighbourhood or where it abuts on a highway. It has no application to a building standing on an isolated ground where its fall can endanger no one. The building pulled down need not be old, for the danger lies in dismantling it whether it be old or new.

The liability of persons rebuilding is only confined to causing danger to human life from the fall of the building. It does not depend upon the annoyance and inconvenience caused to the neighbours or passers-by. Where a workman engaged in constructing an additional floor on a building threw down a brick which caused grievous injuries to a person in the compound adjoining the building, it was held that Section 288 was not applicable.

The offence under Section 288 is non-cognizable, and summons should ordinarily issue in the first instance. It is bailable but not compoundable, and is triable by any Magistrate summarily.

Thank's for Your Vote!
I) iv) that the omission was negligent or. Page 1
I) iv) that the omission was negligent or. Page 2

This work, titled "I) iv) that the omission was negligent or" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Essay

References

AssignBuster. (2021) 'I) iv) that the omission was negligent or'. 10 December.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2021, December 10). I) iv) that the omission was negligent or. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/i-iv-that-the-omission-was-negligent-or/

References

AssignBuster. 2021. "I) iv) that the omission was negligent or." December 10, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/i-iv-that-the-omission-was-negligent-or/.

1. AssignBuster. "I) iv) that the omission was negligent or." December 10, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/i-iv-that-the-omission-was-negligent-or/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "I) iv) that the omission was negligent or." December 10, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/i-iv-that-the-omission-was-negligent-or/.

Work Cited

"I) iv) that the omission was negligent or." AssignBuster, 10 Dec. 2021, assignbuster.com/i-iv-that-the-omission-was-negligent-or/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving I) iv) that the omission was negligent or, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]