INTERNATIONAL

JOURNAL FOR LEGAL

RESEARCH & ANALYSIS
(ISSN 2582 – 6433)

VOLUME I ISSUE VIII

(JANUARY 2021)

Email – editor@ijlra.com
Website – www.ijlra.com

56565656565651
www.ijlra.com
Volume I Issue VIII| January 2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

DISCLAIMER

No part of this publication may be reproduced or copied in any form by any means
without prior written permission of Managing Editor of IJLRA. The views
expressed in this publication are purely personal opinions of the authors and do not
reflect the views of the Editorial Team of IJLRA.

Though every effort has been made to ensure that the information in Volume I
Issue VIII is accurate and appropriately cited/referenced, neither the Editorial
Board nor IJLRA shall be held liable or responsible in any manner whatsever for
any consequences for any action taken by anyone on the basis of information in
the Journal.

Copyright © International Journal for Legal Research & Analysis

1
www.ijlra.com
Volume I Issue VIII| January 2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

EDITORIAL TEAM

EDITORS
Ms. Ezhiloviya S.P.
Nalsar Passout

Ms. Priya Singh

West Bengal National University of Juridical Science

Mr. Ritesh Kumar

Nalsar Passout

Mrs. Pooja Kothari

Practicing Advocate

Dr. Shweta Dhand

Assistant Professor

2
www.ijlra.com
Volume I Issue VIII| January 2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

ABOUT US
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH & ANLAYSIS ISSN
2582-6433 is an Online Journal is Quarterly, Peer Review, Academic Journal,
Published online, that seeks to provide an interactive platform for the publication
of Short Articles, Long Articles, Book Review, Case Comments, Research Papers,
Essay in the field of Law & Multidisciplinary issue. Our aim is to upgrade the
level of interaction and discourse about contemporary issues of law. We are eager
to become a highly cited academic publication, through quality contributions from
students, academics, professionals from the industry, the bar and the bench.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH & ANALYSIS ISSN
2582-6433 welcomes contributions from all legal branches, as long as the work is
original, unpublished and is in consonance with the submission guidelines.

3
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING OF TORTS AND ITS

RELATION WITH CRIME
- Prateek Tanmay1

ABSTRACT:
The law of torts has been a fascinating topic for people, but can anyone think that there could
be a mathematical understanding of the law of torts? It sounds strange, but the idea came into
my mind a couple of months back, and since then, I have been working on this project of
mine. And finally, when I was well-read and researched, I decided to write this paper.
This paper discusses the Mathematical understanding of the Law of Torts and its
mathematical relationship with the law of crime. It starts with the formal introduction of the
topic of research under section I. Further, this paper, further in section II discusses the theme
of the paper, i.e., Mathematical understanding of the Law of Torts and its mathematical
relationshipwith the law of crime. In section II, the paper has been divided into two parts:
viz., Mathematical Understanding of Law of Torts, and Mathematical Relationship of Law of
Torts with Law of Crime to make the readers more comfortable with the theme of the paper.
After discussing the theme of the paper in section II, finally, this paper, in Section III closes
with the conclusion and the major points covered herein and leaves the reader with a sound
takeaway message derived from the work of the author.

Keyword: Law of Crime, Law of Torts, Literature, Mathematics, and Venn diagrams.

I. INTRODUCTION
My dad is a mathematician and I have often heard from him, “Literature and Maths are the
parents of a human. Literature is the mother and maths is thefather, and any human who has
the blessings of these will never be an orphan”. I didn’t realise the importance of this
statement, but lately, in my law school, I started realising the importance of the statement.
When I was growing up in law school, I understood that the whole law is merely literature.
Literature that explains and establishes the fact thathow a normal human being will & should
act and react in normal as well as special circumstances, but I was still not completely
convinced the importance and relevancy of maths as a law student. Lately in my law school,
when I did research on the same and read all the perspectives of the idea of the relevancy of

1
Student, BA LLB, Batch: 2022; South Calcutta Law College (University of Calcutta), Kolkata

4
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

maths in law, Mathematical understanding of torts was the first thing where I found the direct
application of the statement.
Understanding torts is itself a big task because of their complex nature, but when the
mathematical understanding is diluted with the basic idea of torts, the understanding of the
law of torts is going to have its new dimension. The mathematical understanding of the law
of torts has two mathematical topics involved:

(i) Venn Diagram, Intersection & Union of Sets, and

(ii) Definite integrals

The involvement of both themes has been justified in the latter part of the paper. Though
there could be several mathematical theorems and equations which would fit, for now, the
paper contains only two aspects.

II. MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING OF TORTS AND ITS RELATION

WITH CRIME
Inspired by my father, I believe that Mathematics is deeply rooted in law, but it cannot be
traced with the naked eye, one needs a microscopic lens to find it. Finding the deeply rooted
mathematics in Law is not easy, so to make the reading and idea and easy and acceptable, this
section has been divided into two sub-sections:

A. Mathematical Understanding of Law of Torts

I believe that the civil wrong, i.e. Torts happens either because of Lack of Action or Due
to Action, and the collective addition of Nuisance and Negligence completes the list of
torts. When the tort is committed and there is a lack of action, then it is known as
Negligence and when it is committed with the action, it is known as Nuisance. There are
some torts which can be both Nuisance and Negligence. Mathematically, the above
statement(s) can be expressed as:
Law of Torts = Nuisance + Negligence
Torts
NuisanceNegligence

Only Only
Nuisance Negligence
A∩B
(Only A)(Only B)

5
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

Figure: 1

Both Negligence and Nuisance

So, after understanding through the Venn diagram, it can be understood that Tort as a
whole includes Only Nuisance (Torts that are only a nuisance, and not negligence), only
negligence (Torts that are only a negligence, and not nuisance), and torts which are both
nuisance and negligence, or, Tort is simply the combination of Nuisance and Negligence.
Mathematically, it can be expressed as:

Tort = Only Nuisance + Only Negligence + Nuisance ∩ Negligence-- (1)

Or, Tort = Nuisance + Negligence ------------------------------------------ (2)

As stated earlier, there are some torts which are: only negligence, only nuisance, and
both.
(i) ONLY NUISANCE
Some torts are only a nuisance and not negligence. For example, Defamation. If
one will try to fit the definition of Defamation under the umbrella of Nuisance,
one needs to prove that it has happened ‘due to action’. Normally, the case of
defamation arises as a result of some actions. Mathematically, the term ‘only
nuisance’ can be expressed by:
From equation (1),
Tort = Only Nuisance + Only Negligence + Nuisance ∩ Negligence
Only Nuisance = Tort – only negligence +
Nuisance ∩ Negligence ------------------------------- (3)

(ii) ONLY NEGLIGENCE

Some torts are only a negligence and not nuisance. For example, medical
negligence. If one tries to prove that medical negligence is only negligence and
not a nuisance, he/she have to prove that it happens due to ‘lack of action’.
Mathematically, the term ‘only negligence’ can be expressed by:
From equation (1),
Tort = Only Nuisance + Only Negligence + Nuisance ∩ Negligence
Only Negligence = Tort – only nuisance +
Nuisance ∩ Negligence --------------------------------- (4)

(iii) BOTH NUISANCE AND NEGLIGENCE

6
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

Some torts are both negligence and nuisance. For example, Trespass. Trespass is a
kind of torts which would be fit under both negligence as well as a nuisance.
Mathematically, ‘both nuisance and negligence’ can be expressed by:
From equation (1),
Tort = Only Nuisance + Only Negligence + Nuisance ∩ Negligence

Nuisance ∩ Negligence = Tort – only nuisance +

Only negligence ---------------------------------------- (5)

B. Mathematical Relationship of Law of Torts with Law of Crime

It is a well-read and known fact that there is a difference between the Law of Torts and
the Law of Crime, but if one will look through a microscope, he/she will realise that
though there seems to be a difference, the is a mathematical relationship between the two.

Generally, there are two essential ingredients of crime: Actus Reus and Mens Rea. So,
mathematically, crime can be represented by:

Crime = Actus Reus + Mens Rea-------------------------- (6)

Where, Actus Reus = ‘wrongful act’, and

Mens Rea = ‘guilty mind’

Now, let’s go back again to the concept of Negligence and Nuisance. As stated earlier, the
Torts of Negligence happens because of lack of some action (which needed to be
committed, but one failed to perform his duty), and the Tort of Nuisance is committed
due to some actions (which was not needed to perform, but one carried out the task which
finally resulted in nuisance). If one will look at these aspects of the nuisance of
negligence, one will find that in negligence, there is a slight involvement of intention and
that’s what the essential ingredients of crime are. Let’s understand this more broadly and
mathematically.

From equation (6),

Crime = Actus Reus + Mens Rea

The Mathematical expression of Torts of Nuisance would be,

Torts of Nuisance = Wrongful Act + Intention

Here, if one will look at the mathematical expression of Tort, it will come out that the
term ‘wrongful act’ is nothing but ‘Actus Reus’ and the term intention is mere ‘Mens

7
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

Rea’. Now the question is, if the elements of the tort of Nuisance and Crime are the same,
then why there is a difference between the two? It is so because of the magnitude of the
‘wrongful act’ and ‘intention’. Lets’ understand the same in detail, there are some torts of
the nuisance that on a macroscopic level will be termed as a crime if a higher magnitude
is involved. For example, if the tort of ‘battery’ will be looked at from a wider lens, it will
result in a crime under section 319 of IPC (hurt).

Section 319 of IPC defines hurt as:

319. Hurt.—Whoever causes bodily pain, disease, or infirmity to any person is said to
cause hurt.

Battery under the law of torts is defined 2 as:

A battery is the intentional and direct application of any physical force to the person
of another. It is an actual striking of another person or touching him in a rude, anger,
revengeful, or insolvent manner.

The above example proves that if certain torts will be looked at with a wider lens, it will
result in law law of crime. Now, the question is in what circumstances the torts of
nuisance will result in a crime? The one-word answer for the above question will be the
magnitude of the wrongful act under nuisance.

For the tort of battery, merely touching would be enough to establish the commitment of
the tort, but for the ‘hurt’ (under section 319 of IPC), first, it needs to be established that
the action has caused any bodily pain, disease or infirmity, so the clear difference
between the two is the magnitude of the wrongful act. Mathematically, it can be
expressed as:

Crime = Tort of Nuisance + Higher Magnitude-------------- (7)

Or, Tort of Nuisance = Crime – Higher Magnitude

Now, there are some other torts of a nuisance that are directly a crime under IPC, viz.
Defamation, (section 499 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, hereinafter “IPC”) Assault (section
351 of IPC), Battery (section 350 of IPC)

Mathematically, it can be understood by:

2
RATANLAL & DHIRAJALAL, THE LAW OF TORTS, LexisNexis, 27th Ed., p. 249

8
www.ijlra.com
VolumeI IssueVIII| January2021 ISSN: 2582-6433

From Equation (7),

Crime = Torts of Nuisance + Higher Magnitude

𝑦
∫ (𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒)
𝑥

𝑦
= [𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒]𝑥

Where, x = Least Magnitude of wrongful act and intention, and

y = Higher magnitude of wrongful act and intention

Tort of Nuisance = Nuisance with higher magnitude – Nuisance with Least magnitude

So, it is clear that if the magnitude of the wrongful act is beyond y, then, it will be a crime
and if it is less than x, then, either it will not be covered under the umbrella of Law of
Nuisance. To establish that a particular act is torts of the nuisance, it has to be proved that
its magnitude is not more than y, because if the magnitude would be more than that the
value of y, then it would simply be a crime, and if its value would be less than x, it would
not satisfy the essential ingredients of torts of the nuisance.

III. CONCLUSION
No matter where you go, the literature of law will not change its’ core values, nor does the
maths. Be it in India or United States, the basic understanding of the law of torts would be
the same, and this makes the law as a subject more fascinating, and the fact that makes it
more fascinating in the present context is, that it shares its’ core values with maths as well.
No matter where you go, the two plus two is always a four.
If one will ask me about my stand on my father’s statement about maths and literature, I
would bluntly say that I do believe in that theory, now. Though this paper contains only two
aspects of mathematical understanding of the law of torts and the mathematical relationship
between the law of torts and the law of crime, there could be several more aspects.

It can be safely concluded that maths and literature of law are the two sides of the same coin.
The whole maths is based on theorems & laws, and the whole literature of law is just the
logic of actions and reaction of any common man in normal as well as a special
circumstance. If one will attempt to look at law or maths by keeping the other eye closed,
he/she will not get a wide view.

Hence Proved!