- (1.) RAMKRISHAN AGRAWAL 1. In the early stages of the evolution of civilization, the rule of 'survival of the fittest' predominated in the society. With advancement of the civilization, it came to be the function of the State to preserve law and, order and it was the duty of the State to protect the individual constituting the citizens of the State against invasion of their legal rights. How it is illegal for the individual to take law into one's own hands when he is assaulted or wronged by another except in case of highhanded crimes in which the circumstances require immediate and instantaneous defensive action against such crimes when the State help is not available and all the ex -post facto interference by the State may be useless to redress the wrong once done. Practically, this right to take the law into one's own hands is founded on the urgent necessity to protect the individual and his/her lawful interests in those circumstances in which the legal machinery created for the purpose can suffer the wrongful harming or destruction of one's person or interests1. Such urgent necessity or instantaneous defensive action is 'self -defence' based on the instinct of self -preservation. This instinct of self -preservation is indomitable in human being and the instinct has been recognized as a lawful defence in the law of all the civilized countries.2 Self -Defence is a 'Law of Necessity'
(2.) IT is the law of nature or the necessity to which a party may have recourse under certain situations to prevent greater personal injury which he may apprehend. Instantaneous defensive action means a degree of necessity. In other words self -defence is entirely a rule of necessity. Therefore, the right of self -defence is based on necessity and without such necessity the right to resort thereto does not exist.3 The right of self -defence rests upon the broad foundations of necessity4 and it can only be resorted to when the circumstances are such as to warrant a reasonable belief in the party assaulted that the killing is necessary for the preservation of his life or to protect his person from great bodily harm5. It is not necessary to this defence that the danaer should have been impending and immediate about to fall.6 There must be some apparent necessity for taking this right and the party must be either actually in imminent danger or he must believe that he was in imminent danger. It is truly said that the whole thing of 'selfdefence' may be summarized and embraced in one word "necessity.''7
(3.) THE right of self -defence commences, when necessity begins and ends whpn necessity ceases8 and it is true maxim that "necessities inducit privilegium quod jure private" necessity induces or gives a privilege as to private rights. Justification of Necessity (Commodum ex injuria sua memo babare debet9) a person cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own wrongs or convenience cannot accrue to a party from his own wrong. Therefore, necessity is based on two broad maxims -(Vim vi repeller licet)10 resort to force to repel force and (sumemtum vindicatum. red ad propulsandam injuriam)11 but this should be done not for taking revenge but for warding off the injury. ;