Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies

&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

E-Notes

Class : B.A.LL.B & BBA LL.B IV Sem A+B+C

Paper Code : LLB 206

Subject : Law of Crimes II

Faculty Name : Mr. Vivek Tripathi

Unit-1

OFFENCES AGAINST THE HUMAN BODY-I

HOMICIDE

Homicide from the earliest times has fascinated the human mind and has always
been considered as most heinous of offences. The word homicide has been derived
from the latin word ‘homo’ which means a man, and ‘caedere’ which means to cut
or kill. Thus, homicide means the killing of a human being, by a human being. But
then, not all cases of homicide are culpable as all systems of law do distinguish
between lawful and unlawful homicide For instance, killing in self defense or in
pursuance of a lawful authority or by reason of mistake or fact, is not culpable.
Likewise, if death is caused by accident or misfortune, or while doing an act in
good faith and without any criminal intention for the benefit of the person killed,
the man is excused from criminal responsibility for homicide.

Further in some cases the accused may be punished for lesser offences (for e.g.
hurt) even though death has resulted, if the injury resulting in death though
voluntarily caused was not likely to cause death. For example, A gives B a blow
and B, who suffers from an enlarged spleen of which A was not aware, dies as a
1
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

result. A is not guilty of Culpable Homicide as his intention was merely to cause
an injury that was not likely to cause death. It is in connection with with homicide
that the maxim ‘actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea’ has been frequently cited as
stating the two fundamental requirements of criminal liability.

Culpable Homicide/ Manslaughter

The crime of manslaughter is termed as Culpable Homicide. It is a term in the law

of Scotland and England that covers a number of criminal homicides equivalent to
manslaughter in legal criminal jurisdictions.

Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code deals with Culpable Homicide and it is stated
as follows – “Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing
death , or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits
the offence of Culpable Homicide.”

The Penal Code has first defined Culpable Homicide (Section 299, I.P.C) termed
as manslaughter under English law which is genus, and then murder (Section 300,
I.P.C) which is species of homicide.

Explanation 1 – A person who causes bodily injury to another who is laboring

under a disorder, disease or bodily infirmity, and thereby accelerates the death of
that other, shall be deemed to have caused his death.

Explanation 2 – Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes
such bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting
to proper remedies and skilful treatment the death might have been prevented.

Explanation 3 – The causing of the death of a child in the mother’s womb is not
homicide. But it may amount to Culpable Homicide to caused the death of a living

2
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

child, if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not
have breathed or completely born.

Homicide is the killing of a human being by a human being. It is either a) lawful,

or b) unlawful.

a) Lawful Homicide: It is also known as Simple Homicide, includes several

cases falling under the General Exceptions. The death is caused in one of the
following ways :-

● Where death is caused by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal

intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act, in a lawful manner, by
lawful means, and with proper care and caution (s. 80)

● Where the death is caused justifiably, that is to say,

➢ By a person, who is bound, or by mistake of fact in good faith believes

himself bound, by law (s.76)

➢ By a Judge when acting judicially when acting judicially in the exercise

of any power which is, or which in good faith he believes to be, given to him
by law. (s.77)

➢ By a person acting in pursuance of the judgement or order of a Court of

Justice. (s.78)

➢ By a person who is justified or who by reason of a mistake of fact, in

good faith, believes himself to be justified by law.(s.79)

➢ By a person acting without criminal intention to cause harm and in good

faith, for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to person or
property (s.81)
3
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

➢ Where death is caused in the exercise of the right of private defense of

person or property (ss. 100, 103)

● Where death is caused by a child, or person of unsound mind, or an

intoxicated person as will come under ss. 82,83,84 and 85.

● Where death is caused unintentionally by an act done in good faith for

benefit of the person killed, when:

➢ He or, if a minor or lunatic, his guardian, has expressly or impliedly

consented to such an act (ss. 87, 88); or

➢ Where it is impossible for the person killed to signify his consent or

where he is incapable of giving consent, and has no guardian from whom it
is possible to obtain consent, in time for the thing to be done with benefit.
(s.92)

b) Unlawful Homicide: Culpable Homicide is the first kind of unlawful

homicide. It is the causing of death by doing:

i. An act with the intention of causing death.

ii. An act with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to
cause death; or iii. An act with the knowledge that it was likely to cause
death.

Without one or other of those elements, an act, though it may be in its nature
criminal and may occasion death, will not amount to the offence of Culpable
Homicide.

4
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

Culpable Homicide – Essential Elements:

Culpable Homicide is the first kind of unlawful homicide as defined in

Section 299, I.P.C it purports to define and explain as to when an act of
causing death constitutes Culpable Homicide. The important elements are:-

1) Causing of death of a human being.

2) Such death must have been caused by an act:

i. With the intention of causing death; or

ii. With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death; or.

iii. With the knowledge that the doer is likely by such an act to cause death.

The fact that the death of a human being is caused is not enough. Unless one
of the mental states mentioned in ingredient is present, an act causing death
cannot amount to Culpable Homicide. Thus where a constable who had
loaded but defective gun with him wanted to arrest an accused who was
going on a bullock cart by climbing on the cart and there was a scuffle
between him and the accused and in course of which the gun went off and
killed the constable, it was held that accused could not be held guilty of
Culpable Homicide.

Circumstances For Culpable Homicide:

a) Causes Death: In order to hold a person liable under the impugned

Section there must be causing of death of a human being as defined under
Section 46 of the Code. The causing of death of a child in the mother’s
womb is not homicide as stated in Explanation 3 appended to Section

5
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

299, I.P.C. But the person would not be set free. He would be punishable
for causing miscarriage either under Section 312 or 315 I.P.C depending
on the gravity of the injury. The act of causing death amounts to Culpable
Homicide if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the
child may not have breathed or been completely born. The clause ‘though
the child may not have breathed’ suggests that a child may be born alive,
though it may not breath (respire), or it may respire so imperfectly that it
may be difficult to obtain clear proof that respiration takes place. Causing
of death must be of a living human being which means a living man,
woman, child and at least partially an infant under delivery or just
delivered.

b) By Doing An Act With The Intention Of Causing Death: Death may

be caused by various means, such as by poisoning, drowning, striking,
beating and so on and so forth. As explained under Section 32, I.P.C the
word ‘act’ has been given a wider meaning in the Code in as much as it
includes not only an act of commission, but illegal omissions as well and
the word ‘illegal’ is applicable to everything which is an offence or
which is prohibited by law, or which is prohibited by law, or which
furnishes ground for civil action (s.43). Therefore death caused by illegal
omission will amount to Culpable Homicide.

Death caused by effect of words on imaginations or passions:

The authors of the Code observe: “ The reasonable course, in our opinion
, is to consider speaking as an act, and to treat A as guilty of voluntary
Culpable Homicide, if by speaking he has voluntarily caused Z’s death,
whether his words operated circuitously by inducing Z to swallow a
poison or throwing Z into convulsions.”

6
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

c) With The Intention Of Causing Such Bodily Injury as is likely to

cause death: The word ‘intention’ in clause (a) to Section 299, I.P.C has
been used in its ordinary sense, i.e., volitional act done without being
able to foresee the consequence with certitude. The connection between
the ‘act’ and the death caused thereby must be direct and distinct; and
though not immediate it must not be too remote. If the nature of the
connection between the act and the death is in itself obscure, or if it is
obscured by the action of concurrent causes, or if the connection is
broken by the intervention of subsequent causes, or if the interval of time
between death and the act is too long, the above condition is not fulfilled.
Where a constable fired five shots in succession at another constable
resulting in his death, 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. His acts squarely
fell in clauses 2,3 and 4 of s.300, I.P.C i.e Culpable Homicide amounting
to murder.

d) With the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death:

‘Knowledge’ is a strong word and imports certainty and not merely a
probability. If the death is caused under circumstances specified under
Section 80, the person causing the death will be exonerated under that
Section. But, if it is caused in doing an unlawful act, the question arises
whether he should be punished for causing it. The Code says that when a
person engaged in the commission of an offence, without any addition on
account of such accidental death. The offence of Culpable Homicide
supposes an intention, or knowledge of likelihood of causing death. In
the absence of such intention or knowledge, the offence committed may
be grievous hurt, or simple hurt. It is only where death is attributed to an
injury which the offender did not know would endanger life would be
7
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

likely to cause death and which in normal conditions would not do so

notwithstanding death being caused, that the offence will not be Culpable
Homicide but grievous or simple hurt. Every such case depends upon the
existence of abnormal conditions unknown 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, it obvious that the offence
would be Culpable Homicide.

e) 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. For instance,
B with the intention of killing A in order to obtain the insured amount
gave him some sweets mixed with poison. 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. It was held that B as liable
for murder of the children though he intended to kill only A. Death
Caused Inadvertently without Intention While Doing an Unlawful Act: It
has been clearly stated in I.P.C that a person will not be liable for
Culpable Homicide, if he causes the death of a person while doing an
unlawful act, provided he did not intend to kill or cause death by doing
an act that he knew was likely to have that effect. On the other hand,
under English law, if a person whilst committing an unlawful act
accidently kills another, he would be liable for manslaughter or murder
according to whether his act constituted a felony or misdemeanor.

f) Consent is not a defense to Manslaughter: The House of Lords in R v

Walker held that the respondent a truck driver carrying illegal immigrants
will be criminally responsible for involuntary manslaughter, if the act
results in death, even if the victim has consented to take such risk

8
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

engaged in some joint unlawful activity. In this case the defendant, truck
driver ( a Dutch national) drove a lorry from Rotterdam (Netherlands) to
Zeebrugge (United Kingdom). The lorry had been loaded with a
refrigerated container in which 60 Chinese (illegal immigrants) had been
hidden to conceal the illegal human cargo behind a load of tomatoes. The
container was sealed apart from a small air vent which was closed for 5
hours prior to the ferry crossing to Dover to preserve secrecy. On
disembarkation at Dover (in England) the customs officers examined the
container and discovered the bodies of 58 immigrants, who had
suffocated to death. Wacker was charged with 58 offences of
manslaughter and conspiracy to facilitate the entry of illegal entrants into
United Kingdom. Applying the doctrine of negligence( ex turpi causa
non oritur actio) for causing death of the victims the trial convicted and
sentenced the respondent to 6 years imprisonment for each the
manslaughter charges to run concurrently and eight years imprisonment
for the conspiracy to facilitate entry of illegal immigrants with a total of
14 years. This decision was upheld by the House of Lords as well.

MURDER:

Murder, this term traces its origin form the Germanic word “morth” where it
means “secret killing”.

Murder means when one person is killed with an intent of another person
with any malice or a forethought. It can also be said as a serious offence
when compared to Culpable homicide. Moreover an offence will not amount
to Murder unless it includes an offence which falls under the definition of
culpable homicide. To broadly explain, we can say that Murder is a species
where Culpable homicide is a genus.

9
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

Murder consists of four main components which can also be known as

essentials of murder, before going in-depth with essentials, here are the core
concepts discussed: The Culpable homicide amounts to murder except in
some cases, wherein the act which caused murder should be done with an
intention to cause death or Such intention of causing death should cause a
bodily injury to that person or If such intention of causing death causes a
bodily injury and that bodily injury must have caused the death of that
person or He must have the knowledge that the act he has done is
immediately dangerous in all probable sense to cause death or a bodily
injury that is likely to cause death of a person. And it is a crime to commit
an act, even after knowing that the act he does is a risk of causing death or
such injury as discussed above.

ESSENTIALS:

An offence is said to be murder when the act done by a person contains the
following:

 Firstly the act should have an intention of causing death to a person -

this is what said as culpable homicide which amounts to murder and
this includes omission and the illegal omission as well. The act
should be done with a clear intention to kill a person. The intention of
a person should be in a conscious state where the person is aroused
and he must have deliberately acted particularly to kill a person.

For an instance, if a man administers any deadly poison to another, then

it is evident from this act that he has an intention to kill that person,

10
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

where the offender knows the effect of his act clearly. Here the intention
is related to the motive of his thought.

 Secondly the offender has the knowledge that his intention to cause an
bodily injury is likely to cause death of the person – according to
section 300 of IPC, the intention to cause any bodily injury with the
knowledge that such injury will cause death to the person, this will
amount to Culpable homicide which would amount to Murder. Here
the knowledge is not a probability but he is well known that the act he
does against a person is dangerous that would lead to death of such
person. Hence, this is Culpable homicide which amounts to murder.

In a case, Milmadhub Sirchar Vs. R (1885), the deceased was kicked

and beaten for several times by the offender even after the victim
falling senseless. In this case, the court held that the murderer would
have known that beating and kicking several times would surely
result in the death of such person. Thus, he was accused of murder. In
other case, Sheik Choollye Vs. R (1865), a person got his head
fractured after a man who stuck his head with a stick while he was
asleep. The court held that the offender should have known the
likelihood to causing death to that person. And thus, he was convicted
for murder.

 Thirdly if the act done by the offender is done with an intention to

cause any bodily injury as it is sufficient in normal sense to result in
death of that person – the subjective factor ends with the fact that in
any ordinary course of action if a person acts to kill or harm a person
with full knowledge of causing a bodily injury which is sufficient to
cause death of such person. There is no need of any further enquiry in

11
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

this context. In a case, Visra Singh Vs. State of Punjab (1958), the
Supreme Court ruled that when the offender fails to prove that the act
was done accidentally or unintentionally, then the presumption is that
he would have intended to act to cause a deadly injury to the victim
of such crime.

Exceptions of Section 300:

Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if

the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing
death, or Culpable Homicide is not amounting to murder:

Exception 1 to 5 of s300 of IPC defines conditions when culpable

Homicide is not amounting to murder:

1. Provocation,

2. Right of private defense,

3. Public servant exceeding his power,

4. Sudden fight, and

5. Consent.

Section 301; Culpable Homicide By Causing Death Of Person Other

Than Person Whose Death Was Intended:

If a person, by doing anything which he intends or knows to be likely to

cause death, commits Culpable Homicide by causing the death of any
person, whose death he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to
cause, the Culpable Homicide committed by the offender is of the

12
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

description of which it would have been if he had caused the death of the
person, whose death he intended or knew himself to be likely to cause.

Doctrine of Transferred Malice: Blow aimed at the intended victim, if

alights on another, offence is the same as it would have been if the blow
had struck the intended victim. This Section lays down that Culpable
Homicide may be committed by causing the death of a person whom the
offender neither intended, nor knew himself to be likely, to kill. This
Section embodies what the English authors describe as the Doctrine of
Transfer of Malice or the transmigration of motive. Under this Section, if
A intends to kill B but kills C whose death he neither intends nor knows
himself to be likely to cause, the intention to kill C is, by law attributed
to him. Where the accused was deliberately trying to shoot a fleeing man
who had criticized his father in a School Committee Meeting but
unfortunately his own maternal uncle came in between him and the
intended victim and thus got killed, it was held that the act of the accused
was nothing but murder under s.302 read with s.301, I.P.C.

Section 302. Punishment For Murder: Whoever commits murder shall

be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable
to fine. Punishment is a procedure by which the state causes some
torment to the people or property of individual who is discovered
blameworthy of Crime. At the end of the day discipline is endorse forced
on a blamed for the encroachment for the built up rules. The Object of
Punishment is to shield society from insidious and bothersome
components by discouraging potential guilty parties, by keeping the
genuine wrongdoers from submitting further offenses and by
transforming and transforming them into honest nationals. The stage of
punishment is the final process of the criminal jurisprudence system. As

13
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

is well known, one of the fundamental tenets of criminal law is that

“person is considered innocent until proven guilty”. Once the court
comes to a conclusion, based on evaluation of the evidence admitted
before the court, that the accusation are proved against the accused, then
the court necessarily decide the quantum of punishment to be Awarded
to the accused.

Section 304: Punishment For Culpable Homicide Not Amounting To

Murder: Whoever commits Culpable Homicide not amounting to
murder, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with
the intention of causing death, or causing such bodily injury as is likely
to cause death;

Or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend

to ten years, or with fine, or with both, if the act is done with the
knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to
cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.
This Section provides punishment for Culpable Homicide not amounting
to murder. 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 intention of

causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, the
punishment is imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years and 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

14
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

to cause death, the punishment is imprisonment of either description

for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both.

Where the deceased , an old man with an enlarged and flabby heart,
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, it was held that the
offence fell under Section 325 rather than 304 as the accused had no
intention or knowledge to cause death.

Section 304 A: Causing Death By Negligence:

Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not
amounting to Culpable Homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or both.

The original Penal Code had no provision for punishment in those cases where a
person causes death of another by negligence. That is to say, liability for causing
death was limited only to cases of murder and Culpable Homicide not amounting
to murder. Section 304A was inserted in the Penal Code by the Indian Penal Code
Act 27 of 1870 to cover those cases which under English law are termed
Manslaughter by negligence.

The impugned Section provides punishment of either description for a term which
may extend to two years, or fine, or both in case of homicide by rash or negligent
act. The Law Commission of India in 1971 on the basis of strong demand for the
increase in punishment for the offences under this Section recommended for
enhancements of the sentence of imprisonment up to 5 years. But it was not
implemented.

15
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

Essential Ingredients:

To bring a case of Homicide under Section 304A I.P.C the following condition
must exist, viz;

1) There must be death of the person in question

2) The accused must have caused such death; and

3) That such act of the accused was rash or negligent and that it did not amount to
Culpable Homicide.

The requirement of Section 304A, I.P.C are that the death of a person, must have
been caused by doing only rash or negligent act, and that there must be a direct
nexus between death of a person and the rash and negligent act of the accused,
Section 304 A. I.P.C will not apply. Where the accused was allowed to
manufacture of wet paints in the same room where varnish and turpentine were
stored, fire broke out due to a proximity of open burners to the stored varnish and
turpentine. The direct or proximate cause of the fire which resulted in 7 deaths was
the act of one Hatim. Apparently in a hurry, he had perhaps not allowed the resin
to cool sufficiently and poured the turpentine too quickly.

The deaths were therefore not directly the result of the rash act on the part of the
accused, nor one that was proximate and efficient cause without the intervention of
another’s negligence. The accused was therefore acquitted of the offence under
Section 304 A and held liable for negligent conduct with respect to fire or
combustible matter is punishable under Section 285 of the I.P.C. It must be causa
causans (immediate cause); it is not enough that it may have been the causa sine
qua non (a necessary or inevitable cause).

16
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

RASH AND NEGLIGENT ACT

A rash act is primarily an over hasty act. It is opposed to deliberate act. It basically
denotes want of proper care and caution and connotes and overt act with a
consequence of risk that evil consequences might follow but with hope it will not
happen.

Negligence is a breach of duty imposed by law. Negligence may be either civil or

criminal negligence depending upon the nature and gravity of the negligence.
Criminal negligence is gross and culpable, neglect or failure to exercise reasonable
and proper care to guard against injury, either to public generally, or to an
individual in a particular, which having regard to al the circumstances out of which
charge has arisen, it was duty of person to have adopted.

A Person Convicted Under Section 304A, I.P.C is not entitled to the benefit of
probation and lenient Punishment- The apex court in Dalbir Singh, rejected the
plea of the accused driver for invocation of the benevolent provision of Section 4
of the Probation of the Offenders Act, 1958. Medical Negligence: There is an
“implied undertaking” by the member of medical profession that he would use a
fair, reasonable and competent degree of skill. However, a medical practitioner
cannot be found guilty merely because in matter of opinion he made an error of
judgment. The doctor would not be liable for taking and adopting one course of
treatment, whereas other course might have been preferable.

Doctor liable For Negligence Both in Civil and Criminal Law: A doctor when
consulted by a patient owes him certain duties, viz,

1) A duty of care in deciding whether to undertake the case;

2) A duty of care in deciding what treatment to give;

17
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

3) A duty of care in administering that treatment.

A breach of duty gives a cause of action under (i) Law of Torts, or (ii) Consumer
Protection Act, 1986. The doctor is liable to pay compensation to victim if found
liable. In case of civil case in law of torts the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem
court fee, which is about 10% of the amount claimed apart from other expense
incurred. However under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the plaintiff is not
required to pay the court fees or engage a lawyer. He may present his case
personally.

A doctor may also be held liable under the Penal Code for punishment in case of
criminal negligence, for:

a) causing death by rash and negligent act under Section 304A, I.P.C.

b) causing grievous hurt endangering life under Section 388, IPC

c) causing hurt endangering life under Section 337, I.P.C

Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab [ANR 2005]

The plaintiffs, in this case, were the family of Jivan Lal who was admitted and died
in CMC Hospital, Ludhiana. The two doctors who attended the deceased were
Jacob Matthew and Allen Joseph. The doctors had to face the charge of criminal
negligence. The plaintiffs claimed negligence on the doctor's part while procuring
oxygen cylinder for their father. The defense argued that the patient was at the last
stage of cancer. He was not supposed to be admitted to any hospital in lieu of his
degrading health.

The Supreme Court argued in favor of the doctors stating that the plaintiff must
prove that the medical professionals acted “in disregard of the life and safety of the
patient.” A medical professional cannot be held liable if they are following the

18
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

accepted procedure of medical practice. They cannot be reprimanded for not using
an alternative method that might or might not have brought the desired result. They
can only be charged in either of the two conditions:

 if they do not possess the skill to match their profession.

 if they did not show reasonable competence while discharging their

duty;

the standard set here would be of an ordinary competent person.

Section 305: Abetment Of Suicide Of Child Or Insane Person: If any person

under eighteen years of age, any insane person, any delirious person, any idiot, or
any person in a state of intoxication, commits suicide, whoever abets the
commission of such suicide, shall be punished with death or 1[imprisonment for
life], or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine.

Section 306: Abetment Of Suicide: If any person commits suicide, whoever

abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable
to fine.

Section 307: Attempt To Murder: Whoever does any act with such intention or
knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he
would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable
either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore
mentioned.

19
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

Section 308: Attempt To Commit Culpable Homicide: Whoever does any act
with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that, if he by that
act caused death, he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to
murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both; and, if hurt is caused to any
person by such act, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. Illustration A, on
grave and sudden provocation, fires a pistol at Z, under such circumstances that if
he thereby caused death he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to
murder. A has committed the offence defined in this section.

Section 309: Attempt To Suicide : In India, attempt to commit suicide is

punishable u/s 309 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code
thus reads as:

“Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of
such offence shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may
extend to one year or with fine or with both.”

The above section has been the subject of controversy in many cases, especially
over the last two decades. Most notably, the subject was under scrutiny in the cases
of P. Rathinam v. Union of India and Smt. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab. In the
former case, the Division Bench of two judges of the Supreme Court held section
309 as ultra virus of the fundamental rights enshrined in Article 21 of the
Constitution. In the latter case, a Division Bench of three judges of the Supreme
Court had to decide creativeness of P. Rathinam. The earlier decision of Supreme
Court in P. Rathinam was overruled and the court held that section 309 was neither
violative of Article 21 nor Article 14 of the Constitution.

20
 Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)

It is also important to note that the Law Commission of India has also
recommended decriminalizing of attempt to commit suicide in its 42nd and 210th
reports. So far, the law on attempt to commit suicide is still based on the ruling of
Supreme Court in Gian Kaur.

21