You are on page 1of 10




Faculty of Law





CLASS: B.Com., LL.B (Hons.) 4th Semester

Submitted by


B.Com LL.B/2016-17/60

Roll No. - 09

Under the Supervision of

Dr. Gulab Rai

Asst. Prof. in Law

Faculty of Law

Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University


ANUJ PRATAP SINGH INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 2 . CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher Dr. Gulab Rai who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful topic “Culpable Homicide & It’s Punishment” which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to know about so many new things I am really thankful to them.

CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT TABLE OF CONTENT 1.Rewa Ram v. State of MP 1978 CR LJ858(MP) …09 7.0 Punishment of culpable homicide …………………………09 6.0 Culpable Homicide In IPC …………………………………04-06 3.0 Introduction …………………………………………………04 2.0 Doctrine Of Transferred Malice ……………………………07 4.0 Difference between culpable homicide and murder ……08 5.0 BIBILIOGRAPHY …………………………………………10 INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 3 .0 Case:.

0 Introduction The word “homicide” has been derived from Latin terms homi (man) and cido (cut). the person who causes such bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused the death. or with the knowledge. that he is likely by such act to cause death. Explanation 2. or death of the assailant caused in exercise of the right of private defence. Homicide. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT Culpable Homicide & It’s Punishment 1. which is of two types: (1) Culpable homicide amounting to murder. Homicide is the generic term for the causing. is not unlawful.A person who causes bodily injury to another who is labouring under a disorder. for example. are of two types: 1. Literally. The doer is ‘excused’. shall be deemed to have caused his death. like a child under the age of discretion or a person of unsound mind. 2. disease or bodily infirmity. while in letter of defendant’ act is ‘justified’. the word “homicide” means the killing of a human being by another human being. (2) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Unlawful Homicide: The homicides that are made punishable under the Code obviously carry the label of unlawful homicide. or accelerating the death of a human being by another human being. Death caused by an innocent agent. or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. Section 299 and 300 of IPC tell us about the culpable homicide. and thereby accelerates the death of that other. Lawful Homicide: Lawful homicides are those which are covered by ‘Chapter 4: Of General Exceptions’ of IPC 2.Where death is caused by bodily injury. commits the offence of culpable homicide. every homicide is not unlawful or criminal. Explanation 1. although by resorting to proper remedies and skilful treatment the death might have been prevented. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 4 . However.0 Culpable Homicide In IPC Section 299 says that whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death.

the intention is an inference of law resulting from the doing of the act. who spoke the words. The act must have been done— (a) With the intention to cause death. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT Explanation 3. related some exciting or agitating news to B who is in a critical stage of dangerous illness. Hence B is liable for causing the death of the minor because he knew that by illegal omission to provide necessary medical treatment he was likely to cause to D’s death. 2. Death caused by effect of word. By doing an act. D. If the death is caused without intention such an act would not amount to culpable homicide. 4. This element plays important role in making the decision regarding culpable homicide. unlawful inflict an injury on D’s vital organ certain to result in death if not treated. as B the guardian of D (who is minor) refused to get him medically treated because he desired A to be hanged for murder of D. or communicating some socking news.Death may be caused in a number of way. starving. If the death does not happen then it may amount to grievous hurt. death should happen through any act. drowning. The elements necessary to constitute the offence of culpable homicide are— 1. (i) Intention to cause death. of which the probable consequences may be highly injurious. A. 1. It does not include the death of unborn child. etc. though the child may not have breathed or been completely born.Death may also be caused by effect of words such as communication to another which caused excitement which results in death although it would be difficult to prove that the person. B dies in consequences. 2. such as by poisoning. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 5 .the mens rea that means the mental element should be present in this offence. A will be liable for culpable homicide.The causing of the death of child in the mother's womb is not homicide. Such death must have been caused by doing an act. A with the intention or knowledge aforesaid. striking.1 Elements of culpable homicide: The essential element in culpable homicide is the intention of causing death or of such bodily injury as is likely to cause death or knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. succumbed to the injury. (b) With the intention to cause bodily injury as is likely to cause death. Act hence include illegal omission also. When a man is charged with doing an act. (c) With the knowledge that act is likely as such which is enough to cause death.g. 3. For e. such as a child in the mother’s womb. 2. if any part of that child has been brought forth. The causing of death of a human being. Whoever causes death-Death means death of human being. and 3. But it may amount to culpable homicide to cause the death of a living child. anticipated from them an effect which except under very peculiar circumstances and in very peculiar constitution no word would produce.

e Culpable Homicide amounting to murder. The word ‘intention’ in clause (a) to Section 299.If any person gives a blow of punch on a chest of a heart patient.P. the question arises whether he should be punished for causing it. the above condition is not fulfilled. the person causing the death will be exonerated under that Section. (ii) Intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. it obvious that the offence would be Culpable Homicide. For instance.P. In the absence of such intention or knowledge. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT 4.If the death is caused under circumstances specified under Section 80. it was held that it would be native to suggest that he had neither intention to kill nor any knowledge that injuries sufficient to kill in ordinary course of nature would not follow.C i. (iii) Knowledge. But.C has been used in its ordinary sense. I. that the offence will not be Culpable Homicide but grievous or simple hurt. only if the person has caused the bodily injury with an intention to cause death.3 and 4 of s. or if the connection is broken by the intervention of subsequent causes. It is only where death is attributed to an injury which the offender did not know would endanger life would be likely to cause death and which in normal conditions would not do so notwithstanding death being caused. The intended victim ate some of the sweets and threw the rest away which were picked up by two children who ate them and died of poisoning.e. if the offender has knowledge that a particular act may cause the death of the victim then he is said to commit culpable homicide. i.. The offence of Culpable Homicide supposes an intention.knowledge plays an important role in defining culpable homicide. The connection between the ‘act’ and the death caused thereby must be direct and distinct. or simple hurt. or if the interval of time between death and the act is too long. Where a constable fired five shots in succession at another constable resulting in his death. volitional act done without being able to forsee the consequence with certitude. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 6 . If the nature of the connection between the act and the death is in itself obscure. ‘Knowledge’ is a strong word and imports ceratinity and not merely a probability. It was held that B as liable for murder of the children though he intended to kill only A. The Code says that when a person engaged in the commission of an offence. and though not immediate it must not be too remote. 4. Every such case depends upon the existence of abnormal conditions unkown to the person who inflicts injury. Once it is established that an act was a deliberate acct and not the result of accident or rashness or negligence. or knowledge of likelihood of causing death. and that patient died then that person can be convicted of culpable homicide. if it is caused in doing an unlawful act.300. 4. the offence committed may be grievous hurt.(iv) Death Caused of Person Other Than Intended: To attract the provisions of this Section it suffices if the death of a human being is caused whether the person was intended to be killed or not. B with the intention of killing A in order to obtain the insured amount gave him some sweets mixed with poison. without any addition on account of such accidental death. or if it is obscured by the action of concurrent causes. I. His acts squarely fell in clauses 2.

There is. This is usually when the original plan brings about an injury or harm which is similar to that intended but the victim is different so there is no mens rea for the second victim unless it can be transferred from the first. after all. and society is protected in the process. As we shall see there are limits to the doctrine. The defendant was found liable for the injuries suffered by the woman and was convicted even though he had not intended to harm the woman. a victim. The mens rea of the original attack was transferred to the second and no 'further' or 'secondary' mens rea was required. The principle being that just because someone had the necessary mens rea for one offence it cannot be assumed that they had the mens rea for another type of offence. The soldier used his belt to hit the other person but the belt rebounded off the original victim and hit a woman causing facial injuries. so the law. The wife took a bite but then handed the apple to their daughter and the daughter then died. In Latimer the defendant was a soldier who got into a fight. unintentionally. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 7 .0 Doctrine Of Transferred Malice We are going to look at what happens if a defendant argues that he cannot be guilty of a crime because he meant to hit someone else not the actual victim. In effect he is saying he did not have the necessary mens rea and his actions amounted to an accident. One further point which needs to be made clear is the situation when it is necessary for the doctrine to be used. but not if a different offence takes place. By enabling justice for the victim the law is also enabling the perpetrator to be punished appropriately for their wrong doing. Some will argue that this is fair and right because the defendant intended to carry out an offence in any event. There are parameters to the rule and this includes the principle that the rule can only be applied if a similar offence to the one that was originally planned actually happened. In effect the law says that the defendant is accountable if he or she intended to carry out a similar offence although the victim was different. Is the common law sufficiently flexible to be able to deal with this? The answer is that the common law has established the doctrine of transferred malice in order to criminalise the defendant's conduct. by using the doctrine. The case of R v Latimer (1886) is an example of the doctrine. but to then use that to show that the defendant also had the mens rea for criminal damage seems to be a step too far. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT 3. The court determined that he could not be convicted of the criminal damage offence – the doctrine of transferred malice could not be applied. This was illustrated in the case of R v Pembleton (1874) where the defendant intended to throw a stone at a mob of people but he missed the crowd and. To deduce that someone had the mens rea of an assault is one thing. he had been attacked by another individual and retaliated by hitting back. His plan was to kill her in order that he could marry again. broke a window instead. This can be shown in the case of R v Saunders (1573) where the defendant handed his wife an apple which he had poisoned with arsenic. The defendant was convicted of the murder of the daughter and his intention to murder his wife was transferred to the daughter. is trying to enable the victim to receive justice which might otherwise not be available to them.

it is death sentence. there is a deep pit on the road that is covered by a wooden plank. Degree to certainty of death. I know that you walk on a particular road everyday to go to your workplace. it so happens that you do not notice. Let's take 2 examples- 1) Let's say. This is Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT 4. Intention. Now.Yes. 2) As opposed to the above.Yes. Murder is a special kind of Culpable Homicide. Now. So.Most certain. You would appreciate the brilliance of law and the philosophy when you fully understand the difference. I intend to kill you. Also called 'Manslaughter' in some nations. (II) The difference lies in the degree of certainty of death. This is murder.0 Difference between culpable homicide and murder All Murders are culpable homicides but not culpable homicides are murders. They are referred to as culpable homicide not amounting to Murder. Death.Yes. One day. (I) First difference is. fall and die. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 8 .Yes. I go and take out the flank thinking that you would probably not notice. (III) The third difference is- The punishment for Culpable Homicide is life imprisonment and for Murder. I walk straight to your house with a gun and shoot 10 bullets right in your brain. Intention. Death. you may not die). Culpable Homicide is the genus and Murder is the specie. fall and die. Degree of certainty of death.Not so much (There is always the chance that you may notice the pit or even after falling. And the culpability of a person depends on that.

the punishment is imprisonment for life. she developed hyperpyrexia. and shall be liable to fine. b) If the act is done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.0 Punishment of culpable homicide Section 304 tells us whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder. or with fine. debilitated individuals. or with both.Rewa Ram v. then the person inflicting the injuries is liable for causing death. as a result of which she died. or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years. The Madhya Pradesh High Court placed reliance on expln 2 to s 299. This section provides punishment for two separate degrees of culpable homicide depending upon the intention to causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death under para 1 and knowledge that the act is likely to cause death under para 2. or of causing such bodily injury is likely to cause death. Gyanvatibai .0 Case:. the punishment is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years. even if death was not the direct result of the injuries. it was held that the offence fell under Section 325 rather than 304 as the accused had no intention or knowledge to cause death. was lifted by the accused during a quarrel and thrown on the ground from some distance with sufficient force and the deceased got his ribs fractured and died of a rupture of the heart. She was admitted into the hospital and an operation was performed on her. who already had some temperature. or with fine.IPC. Therefore. State of MP 1978 CR LJ858(MP) The accused had caused multiple injuries with a knife to his wife. or with both. Or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years. Where the deceased . CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT 5. The doctor who performed the postmortem opined that the dead was not as a result of multiple injuries. This Section provides punishment for Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder . or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and fine.e. This hyperpyrexia was a result of atmospheric temperature on weak. but because of hyperpyrexia. or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. 6. i. Under it there are two kinds of punishments applying to two different circumstances: a) If the act by which death is caused is done with the inetention of causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. but without any intention to cause death. if the act by which death is caused is done with the intention of causing death. INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 9 . if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death. an old man with an enlarged and flabby heart. shall be punished with imprisonment for life. high temperature. It observed that if the supervening causes are attributed to the injury caused.

2nd Ed. 2006 PSA Pillai’s Crimnal law 12th Ed. CULPABLE HOMICIDE & IT’S PUNISHMENT 7..2014 INDIAN PENAL CODE Page 10 . M.0 BIBILIOGRAPHY Mishra S. Indian Penal Code.. N. Repr. 2012 Gandhi B. 18th Ed. Indian Penal Code.