Forensic psychiatry: involuntary intoxication: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Forensic psychiatry: involuntary intoxication

Sample item

A man given a drink laced with a sedative without his knowledge assaults someone, being unable to understand the nature of his act. How does Indian law treat his act?

ANot excused, but the sentence is halvedBExcused only if he had become intoxicated voluntarilyCNot excused, because intoxication never affects criminal liabilityDExcused, because the intoxication was administered without his knowledge or against his will

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

D. Excused, because the intoxication was administered without his knowledge or against his will

Indian criminal law excuses an act done by a person who, through intoxication caused without his knowledge or against his will, was incapable of knowing its nature or that it was wrong. Voluntary intoxication is no defence, though it may be considered in judging intention in some situations.

Option by option

A. Not excused, but the sentence is halved
There is no provision that halves the sentence in this situation.
B. Excused only if he had become intoxicated voluntarily
Voluntary intoxication is not a defence, which is the opposite of this option.
C. Not excused, because intoxication never affects criminal liability
Intoxication does not always preclude responsibility, but involuntary intoxication does.
D. Excused, because the intoxication was administered without his knowledge or against his will (correct)
Involuntary intoxication with incapacity is a defence.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is D, Excused, because the intoxication was administered without his knowledge or against his will. Indian criminal law excuses an act done by a person who, through intoxication caused without his knowledge or against his will, was incapable of knowing its nature or that it was wrong.

Why is "Not excused, but the sentence is halved" not the answer?

There is no provision that halves the sentence in this situation.

Why is "Excused only if he had become intoxicated voluntarily" not the answer?

Voluntary intoxication is not a defence, which is the opposite of this option.

Why is "Not excused, because intoxication never affects criminal liability" not the answer?

Intoxication does not always preclude responsibility, but involuntary intoxication does.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Forensic psychiatry: involuntary intoxication in Forensic Medicine. Voluntary intoxication is no defence, though it may be considered in judging intention in some situations.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as a multi-step question: it asks you to combine more than one idea. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Forensic psychiatry: involuntary intoxication?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.