You are on page 1of 5

Dr.

Ram Manohar Lohiya
National Law University,
Lucknow
2012-13

Rough Draft – riminal Law- !
Critical Analysis of Basdev v State of Pepsu


"U#M!$$%D $&' "U#M!$$%D #('

Mr. K A Pandey Vipasha Ghangoria
Asstt. Professor (Law) III e!ester ".A. LL.". (#ons.)
Ro$$ %o. &'(
ignature ignature
)"%
"asde) ) tate of Pepsu
!$)$!&N
AIR &*'+ , (--
!N$R&DU$!&N
.his /ase is 0asi/a$$y a0out 1Into2i/ation as a defense in /ri!ina$ $aw3. e/tion -+ dea$s
with that /$ass of /ases where a !an gets into2i/ated )o$untari$y. It i!putes the sa!e
4now$edge to su/h a !an as he wou$d ha)e had5 had he not 0een into2i/ated. 6ne who
sins when drun4 0e punished when he is so0er5 qui peccat ebius luat sobrius. .he fa/ts of
the /ase are that the appe$$ant was )ery drun4 and )o$untari$y into2i/ated when he as4ed
a 0oy to !o)e fro! his p$a/e and when the 0oy de/$ined5 he shot the 0oy with a pisto$.
.his /ase5 first of a$$ /a!e 0efore the essions ,ourt. .he appe$$ant was awarded the
$esser pena$ty of transportation for $ife. .he appe$$ant appea$ed to the P7P8 #igh ,ourt
in Patia$a whi/h pro)ed unsu//essfu$. pe/ia$ $ea)e was granted 0y the upre!e ,ourt
$i!ited to the 9uestion whether the offen/e /o!!itted 0y the petitioner fe$$ under se/tion
:;< of the Indian Pena$ ,ode or se/tion :;( of the Indian Pena$ ,ode ha)ing regard to
the pro)isions of se/tion -+ of the Indian Pena$ ,ode.
R%"%)R* +U%"$!&N"
.he 9uestions that sha$$ 0e answered during the /ourse of the pro=e/t are>
• ?hether there is a distin/tion 0etween intention5 4now$edge and !oti)e under the
Indian Pena$ ,ode@
In !any /ases there is a thin $ine of distin/tion 0etween intention5 4now$edge and
!oti)e. .he 9uestion to 0e /onsidered is what separates the three under IP,.
• ?hether in present /ase offen/e of !urder under inf$uen/e of drin4 /an 0e
redu/ed to /u$pa0$e ho!i/ide not a!ounting to !urder under se/ond part of s.
:;( of IP,@
.he a//used was into2i/ated. .he 9uestion to 0e /onsidered is whether it o0s/ured his
thin4ing and whether he /ou$d not ha)e thought a0out the /onse9uen/es of his a/t.
• ?hether into2i/ation rendered the appe$$ant in/apa0$e of for!ing any intention@
.he degree of into2i/ation sha$$ 0e deter!ined fro! the fa/ts of the /ase and it sha$$
0e ana$yAed whether the appe$$ant was in/apa0$e of for!ing any intention.
• ?hether there is any differen/e 0etween defense of insanity /aused 0y e2/essi)e
drun4enness and the defense of drun4enness whi/h !a4es a person in/apa0$e of
for!ing any intention@
.he differen/es 0etween 0oth the defenses sha$$ 0e e$a0orated during the /ourse of the
pro=e/t.
R%,!%- &. $*% L!$%R)$UR%
ases re/erre0 to in this ase'
• Re2 ). Mea4in
• Regina ). ,ruse and Mary his wife
• Reg. ). Mon4Bhouse
• Reg. ). Doherty
• Re2 ). Meade
• Dire/tor of Pu0$i/ Prose/utions ). "eard
-as the tren0 /ollowe0 in the 1resent case2
.he trend was fo$$owed in the present /ase that into2i/ation5 whether in)o$untary or
)o$untary /annot 0e p$eaded as a defense so as to e2/u$pate the a//used fro! any $ia0i$ity
su0=e/t to /ertain /onditions. It wou$d on$y 0e of he$p in !itigating the senten/e.
In Rex v Meade, it was he$d that a person is intended to 4now the /onse9uen/es of his a/t
0ut su/h a presu!ption /an 0e re0utted if the person pro)es that he was in su/h a state of
into2i/ation so as to 0e/o!e in/apa0$e of 4nowing the /onse9uen/es of his a/t.
In Director of Public Prosecution v Beard, it was he$d that se$fBindu/ed into2i/ation is no
defense to a /harge of /ri!e5 i.e.5 the a//used ga)e way to )io$ent passion.
In Director of Public Prosecution v Majewski, it was he$d that se$fBindu/ed into2i/ation
pro)ides no defense and is irre$e)ant to offen/es of 0asi/ intent5 su/h as assau$t.
In Bablu alias Mubaraik Hussain v State of Rajasthan, the , he$d that defense of
drun4enness /an 0e a)ai$ed of on$y when into2i/ation produ/es su/h a /ondition as the
a//used $oses the re9uisite intention for the offen/e.
R%"%)R* M%$*&D&L&3(
.he resear/h !ethodo$ogy e!p$oyed for the pro=e/t on this topi/ is do/trina$ or $i0raryB
0ased !ethodo$ogy. .he issues in)o$)ed5 9uestion of $aw sha$$ 0e identified and ana$yAed.
.he fa/ts sha$$ 0e ana$yAed in ter!s of Law. It wi$$ a$so a!ount to signifi/ant 0a/4ground
reading on the topi/ on whi/h this ,ase is 0ased upon.
L%3!"L)$!&N !$%D
Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. -+
Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. :;<
Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. :;(
$%N$)$!,% #!#L!&3R)4*(
• https>CCwww.west$awindia./o!
• https>CCwww.goog$e./o!
• K.D. Gaur5 1,ri!ina$ Law ,ases and Materia$s35 +
th
7dition5 Le2is%e2is
"utterworth ?adhwa.

Related Interests