ABSTRACT
This chapter presents the Macaulays opinion that the defences of duress and necessity were too difficult to formulate for inclusion in his draft Penal Code and that cases where they were pleaded were best dealt with through the exercise of executive clemency. It explains the defences that are contained in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as their cardinal feature. Section 94 requires the threat to be of instant death, by which it is meant that the coercer would kill the defendant within an extremely short time after the latters refusal to carry out the crime he or she was ordered to commit. Macaulay's invocation for the law to be laid down as clearly and concisely as possible and to minimise judicial discretion. A critical evaluation of the existing IPC provision on duress found many of its conditions to be sound. A similar exercise found the IPC provision on necessity to be much less satisfactory.
