AN INTRODUCTION

TO CRIMINAL LAW
SRI BISWARANJAN ROUT,
ASST.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
BHUBANESWAR
INTRODUCTION
 The term 'Crime' denotes an unlawful act and
this unlawful act is punishable by a state.
 A common principle about Criminal Law is that, unless
an activity is prohibited by law, it does not qualify
as a crime. Incidents of crime hurt not only the
individual, but also the state.
 Therefore, such acts are forbidden and
punishable by law.
 The body of laws which deals with imposing
punishments on crimes is known as Criminal Law.
 “Nulla poena sine lage / nulla crimen sine lage”
Nothing is punishable / a crime without specific legislation.

 Principle of legality – An act not declared by law of the

land and as a crime is not
a crime.
 Crime – Punishment is awarded for breach/violation of
law but one cannot be punished for nothing else.
WHAT DO WE
UNDERSTAND
BY CRIME?
 CATEGORIES OF
CRIMES
 STAGES OF
CRIME
 ELEMENTS OF
CRIME
 INTENTION
AND
MOTIVE
1. R Vs. Prince :–
Facts – Defendant was convicted for taking a 14-year-old
unmarried girl out of the possession and without the consent of her
parents. At trial, the jury found that although the girl was 14 at the
time, she had told Defendant and he had reasonably believed that she
was 18. The statute he was convicted under was silent as to the
mental state required to make the act a crime. Defendant appeals.
2. The Queen Vs. Tolson – Does second marriage on a reasonable
belief of death of the husband amounts to bigamy on his return?

 Facts – The appellant and defendant were married in September

1880. The appellant went missing as the ship he was in had got
lost into the sea in December 1881. The defendant waited for six
years for her husband (the appellant) with the hope that he shall
return. Eventually, believing her husband to be dead, the
defendant remarries. Eleven months later the appellant returned
and on the knowledge of the remarriage of his wife (the defendant)
he filed the appeal of bigamy against her.

3. R. Vs. Dudley and Stephens.

Facts – The two defendants and a boy between the ages of
seventeen and eighteen were cast away in an open boat at sea
following a storm. The boat drifted in the ocean and was
considered to be more than one thousand miles from land. After
seven days without food and five without water, S suggested
that lots should be drawn with the loser being put to death to
provide food for the remaining two. Subsequently however, D
and S colluded to the extent that the boy should be killed so
that they could survive. On the twentieth day, with the
agreement of S, D killed the boy and both the defendants ate
him for the following four days until rescue. It was argued that
the defendants believed that in the circumstances they would
die unless the boy was killed.

Your thoughts and opinions on the above cases.

1) Held – No. Conviction affirmed. Mistake of fact does not stand as
a defense to a crime where the statute making the act a crime
contains no requirement of knowledge of that fact to begin with. In
this case the forbidden act is wrong in itself and the legislature has
enacted that if anyone does this act, he does so at his own risk.
2) Held – The appeal court said that despite the absence of words
such as “knowingly committing bigamy” or “intentionally
committing bigamy”, which would have excused her, Ms. Tolson
was saved in this situation by an old common law rule. An “honest
and reasonable belief” in the existence of circumstances that, if
true, would make the accused’s acts innocent, was a proper
defense, the court ruled.
3) Held – The defence of necessity was not available as a defence to
murder on these facts. It is not possible to justify the killing of one
individual in order to save the life of another on the basis that the
Although the judgment is generally accepted and followed
(see Buckole v Greater London Council [1971] Ch 655), the
judgment implies that the jury’s finding that there was no
greater justification for killing the boy than for any of the
castaways, suggests that the unavailability of the defence may
have resulted from the collusion between the defendants.
 CRIMES AGAINST
PERSON

CRIMES AGAINST
CATEGORIES OF MORALITY
CRIMES
CRIMES AGAINST
PROPERTY

WHITE COLLAR
CRIMES

ORGANISED
CRIMES
 COMMISSION

ATTEMPT

PREPERATION

INTENTION
Elements of Crime: Guilty Act and
Guilty Mind
 To be classified as a crime, the act of doing something bad
(actus reus) must be usually accompanied by the intention to
do something bad (mens rea).
 A crime is said to exist usually when both these elements are
present.
 Unless this mental element is present, no act is usually criminal
in nature. So, all crimes must have a physical element and a mental
element, usually called actus reus and mens rea respectively.
“actus non acit reum nisi mens
sit rea ”
 The principle of actus reus and mens rea are embedded in
the Latin maxim.
 This latin maxim means that an act does not make one guilty
unless the mind is also legally blameworthy.
 In other words, for a physical act to be termed a crime, it
must be accompanied by the necessary mental element.
 What is actus reus?

The word actus connotes a 'deed'
which is a physical result of human
conduct.
 the word reus means 'forbidden by
law’.
It is made up of three constituent
parts, namely:
1. An action or a conduct
2. The result of that action or
conduct
3. Such act/conduct being
prohibited by law
What is mens rea?
 Mens rea generally means 'ill
intention'.
 The constituents of mens
rea are:
1.There must be a mind at
fault/intention to constitute a
crime.
2.The act becomes criminal
when the actor does it with a
guilty mind.

Illustrations:
 An executioner's job is to hang (no
actus reus)
 An army man kills as a part of his
duty (no actus reus)
 INTENTION MOTIVE
 Intention is the thing you  Motive is the ulterior
plan to do and achieve. objective behind an act.

 Some actions might  Every act has some kind of

not have an intention. motive(good or bad)

 Key element in  Considered to be irrelevant

determining criminal in criminal law.
liability.
CRIMINAL
LAW IN
INDIA
 OBJECTIVES
 SOURCES
 INDIAN PENAL
CODE,1860
 CRIMINAL
PROCEDURAL
CODE,1973
 INDIAN EVIDENCE
ACT,1872
 CRIMES-SPECIAL
&
LOCAL LAWS
OBJECTIVES

RETRIBUTION

RESTORATION DETERRENCE

REHABILATION INCAPACITATION
The Purpose Of Criminal Law In
India
 to define a variety of crimes e.g. theft,
cheating, murder, etc.
 to prescribe appropriate punishment for each
crime e.g. imprisonment or fine, and
 to lay down suitable investigation and trial
procedures.
 Sources of Criminal Law
 The Indian Penal Code, 1860, which defines various crimes such as
murder, theft, etc.

 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which lays down the procedure

for both the police to investigate crimes and for trial of offences.

 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which stipulates the kind of

evidence admissible in court.

 Special Criminal Laws passed by the Parliament or State Legislatures

such as the Prevention of Corruption Act, Food Adulteration Act,
Dowry Prevention Act, Commission of Sati Act etc.
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
 The Indian Penal Code was passed in 1860 and came into
force in 1862.
 INSPIRATION- French Penal Code and Code of
Louisiana in the US.
 The Indian Penal Code is divided into 23 chapters,
comprising over 500 sections.
 The Code starts with an Introduction, provides explanations and
exceptions used in it, and then lists a wide range of offences.
• Indian Penal Code (IPC) covers the
substantial part of criminal law in India. It
defines various common criminal offences.

For example, it defines

murder, theft, assault and
a number of other
offences and thus
stipulates appropriate
punishments for each
such offence.
The Punishment for theft is stipulated in
the following Section 379 which states:

“Whoever commits theft shall be

punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years, or
with fine, or with both.”
Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 (CrPC)
 The object of the Criminal Procedure Code is to
provide a mechanism for the investigation and
trial of offenders.
 It lays down the rules for conduct of
investigation into offences by the police
proceedings in court against any person who has
committed an offence under any Criminal law,
whether it is IPC or a Crime classified under any
other law.
CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCES
 Classified according to the nature and gravity of the offence.

BAILABLE NON-BAILABLE

Right to get bail while the trail is Serious offence-Bail can be obtained
pending. only by court’s discretion.

COGNIZABLE NON-COGNIZABLE
Serious offence- accused can be Police hast to wait for warrant from
arrested without warrant. court.

COMPOUNDABLE NON-COMPOUNDABLE
Accused can come to an Serious offences- convicts of crime such
arrangement with the state as murderers, thieves, frauds, etc…
prosecution. cannot compound their crimes.
E.g. Caught travelling without ticket
on a bus/train.
STAGES IN PROSECUTION OF
AN OFFENCE

INVESTIG
ENQUIRY TRIA
ATION
L
STAGES OF INVESTIGATION
PROCCEDING TO
THE SPOT

ASCERTAING
FACTS

DISCOVERY AND
ARREST OF
SUSPECTED
OFFENDERS

COLLECTION OF
EVIDENCE

FORMATION OF
POINIONS

POLICE REPORT TO
MAGISTRATE
STAGES OF TRIAL

Framing of Recording of Statement of

charge or giving prosecution
of notice evidence accused

Defence
Final argument Judgement
evidence
Indian Evidence Act 172
 The Indian Evidence Act stipulates how facts can be proved
through evidence.
 One of the main objectives of the Evidence Act is to prevent the
inaccuracy in the admissibility of evidence and to introduce a
more correct and uniform rule of practice.
 The main principles which form the foundation of Law of
Evidence are
 evidence must be confined to the matter at hand
 hearsay evidence must not be admitted
 best evidence must be given in all cases.
The Act is divided into three parts:
 Part I - Relevancy of facts or what facts may or may not be
proved. These are dealt 2 with in detail in (Sections 5 to 55).
 Part II - How the relevant facts are to be proved? The part
deals with matters, 2 which need not be prove under law and also
how facts-in-issue or relevant facts are proved through oral and
documentary evidence (Sections 56 to 1).
 Part III - By whom and in what manner must the evidence be
produced. It deals 2 with the procedure for production of
evidence and the effects of evidence (Sections 11 to 167).
Admission and confession:
 Admission and confession: Sections 17 to 31 deals with
admission generally and include Sections to which
deal with confession as distinguished from admission.
Crimes under the Special Acts and
Local Laws
 Certain acts are to be considered criminal acts
even when they are not to be found in IPC. This is
because they have been identified as crimes in
Special and Local Laws.
 Arms Act, 1959
 Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
 Gambling Act, 1867
 Excise Act, 1944
 Prohibition Act
 Explosives & Explosive substances Act, 1884 &1908
 Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956
 Railways Act, 1989
 Registration of Foreigners Act, 1930
 Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
 Indian Passport Act, 1967
 Other crimes (not specified above) under Special and Local
Laws including Cyber Laws under Information Technology Act
(IT), 2000.
 HARSHAD MEHTA
 his career with New India Assurance
Co.
 Quit his job in 1981 to become a sub-
broker.
 Went bankrupt in 1982 & recovered
soon to become more stronger.
 Went on to become one the most successful
broker --The Rags to Riches Story, thereby
earning the nick name of THE BIGBULL´
 WHAT WAS THE SCAM ALL ABOUT
1 Diversion of funds
2Use of Ready Forward (RF) to maintain
SLR (Statutory Liquidity Ratio)
THE END
THANK YOU