Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Murder
Lawful Unlawful
Homicide Homicide
Justifiabl Causing
Excusable Culpable
e death by
Homicide Homicide Negligence
Homicide
Murder
Culpable Homicide
Sec 299 of IPC defines the offence of culpable homicide.
2. By doing an act.
So the Court held that the accused had knowledge that by their
acts they were likely to cause the death of the deceased though
without any intention to cause death.
Culpable Homicide
Sec 299 of IPC is appended with three explanations.
Explanation 1:
• Causing bodily injury to a person labouring under a disorder,
disease or bodily infirmity and thereby accelerating his death has
been deemed to be causing his death under the first explanation. It
is futile for the offender to contend that had the deceased not been
labouring under a disorder, disease or bodily infirmity he would not
have died.
• This explanation pre-supposes that the act on the part of the accused
falls under at least one of the ingredients of section 299. If such is
not the case and the prosecution fails to establish on the part of the
accused either intention to cause death, or intention to cause such
bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or knowledge that the bodily
injury is such as is likely to cause death, this explanation will not be
applicable.
Culpable Homicide
Explanation 2:
• It provides for a situation wherein a person who has been injured
could have recovered and escaped death, if, he had been given
prompt and proper medical treatment. In such situations too,
the fact that the injured person died because he could not avail of
good medical treatment, cannot be ground for excusing the guilt of
the person who inflicted the injury.
• Sellappan v. State of Tamil Nadu (Appeal (crl.) 123 of 2007)
In this case, the accused gave two blows with a stick to the deceased
on the head. Subsequently the deceased was admitted to the
hospital and after 1 week the deceased died because of the injuries.
Here the Supreme Court held that the plea of the accused that with
proper treatment, life of the deceased could have been saved is not
tenable in view of explanation 2 to section 299. The accused was
convicted for culpable homicide.
Culpable Homicide
Explanation 3:
• It provides that if the death of the child is caused when still in the
mother’s womb, it is not culpable homicide. However, if any
portion of the child, comes out of the mother’s womb, even if it is
not fully born, and if the death is caused to such a child, then it
would amount to culpable homicide if requirements mentioned
in section 299 are fulfilled..
• In other words, killing of a pregnant woman is only one
homicide and not homicides because as long as a child is in the
mother’s womb it has no independent existence of its own.
Murder
Sec 300 of IPC defines murder with reference to the offence of
culpable homicide defined u/s 299 of IPC.
Only if an act falls under clauses 1-4 of sec 300, then culpable
homicide will amount to murder.
If the act comes under the exceptions given below sec 300
than it is culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Murder is the aggravated form of culpable homicide.
It can be said that all murders are culpable homicide but all
culpable homicides are not murder.
Murder
According to sec 300, Culpable Homicide amounts to murder in the following
cases:
1) If the act is done with the intention of causing death.
2) If the act is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender
knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused.
3) If the act is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is sufficient
in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
4) If the act is done with the knowledge, that it is so imminently dangerous that it
must, in all probability, cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death, and such act is committed without any excuse for incurring the risk of
causing death or injury.
Murder
1. If the act is done with the intention of causing death:
• Intention connotes a conscious state in which mental faculties are roused
into activity and summoned into action for the deliberate purpose of
being directed towards a particular and specified act and which the
human mind conceives and perceives before itself.
• Intention is what intention does. So, the intention of the person
can be gathered from the action of the person.
• If a person administers a deadly poison to a man, then it is very clear that
he has an intention to kill that man, because the cause and effect of the
act are very clear. It is evident that the effect of poisoning is to cause
instant death.
Murder
Selvaraj vs State Of Tamil Nadu (1998) 9 SCC 308
4. Sudden Fight.
5. Consent.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
Exception 1 - Grave and Sudden Provocation:
Culpable homicide will not be murder, if, the offender on
account of grave and sudden provocation, is deprived of his
power of self-control and causes the death of a person.
This exception is subject to certain conditions:
a. The provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the
offender as an excuse.
b. The provocation is not given by anything done in obedience
to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the
powers of such public servant.
c. The provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful
exercise of the right of private defence.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
K M Nanavati vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 1962 SC 605)
In this case, the accused was a naval officer. One day, his wife confessed
to him that she had developed intimacy with the deceased. Enraged at
this, the accused went to ship, took a revolver and six cartridges from
the store of the ship, went to the flat of the deceased, entered his
bedroom and shot him dead. Thereafter the accused surrendered
himself to the police.
Here the Supreme Court held that the accused, after his wife confessed
about the illicit relationship, may have momentarily lost control. He had
thereafter dropped his wife and children to a cinema, left them there,
went to his ship, took a revolver on a false pretext, loaded it with six
rounds, did some official business there, and drove his car to the office
of deceased and then to his flat, went straight to the bed-room of
deceased and shot him dead. There was sufficient time for him to regain
self-control. So the Court held that it is not a case under exception of sec
300 and convicted the accused for murder.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
K M Nanavati Cont…..
Here the Supreme Court has laid down certain guidelines relating to
grave and sudden provocation:
i. The test of grave and sudden provocation is whether a reasonable
person belonging to the same class of society as the accused, placed in
a similar situation, would be so provoked as to lose his self control.
ii. In India, unlike in England, words and gestures may, under certain
circumstances cause grave and sudden provocation so as to attract that
Exception.
iii. The mental background created by any previous act of the
victim can also be taken into consideration in judging whether the
subsequent act could cause grave and sudden provocation.
iv. Fatal blow should be clearly traced to the influence of the passion
arising from that provocation and not after the passion had
cooled down by lapse of time or otherwise, giving room and scope
for premeditation and calculation.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
Bhura Ram vs State of Rajasthan (2003) 9 SCC 205
In this case, the accused, armed with weapon and accompanied
with others, entered into the hut of the deceased. Apprehending
danger to his life, the deceased fired at one of the companions of
the accused and thereby caused his death. The accused then
attacked the deceased with an axe on his head and killed him.
During trial he pleaded that the death of the companion caused
grave and sudden provocation to him.
Here the Supreme Court refused to accept the plea as the accused
himself was the aggressor and he solicited the provocation.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
Exception 2 – Exceeding the Right of Private Defence:
• Under ‘General Exceptions’ a person has right of private defence
of person and property. This right under certain circumstances
even extends to causing death. This clause deals with the
situation where a person exceeds the right of private defence.
The factor of private defence reduces the gravity of offence from
murder to culpable homicide.
• Before this exception can be availed of, it has to be proved that
the accused had the right of private defence as given u/s 96-106
of IPC.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
Here the Supreme Court held that the force used was out of all
proportion to the supposed danger, which no longer existed
from the deceased. So, the accused was neither entitled to a right
of private defence, nor to the benefit under exception 2 of sec 300.
Therefore, the accused was convicted for the offence of murder.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
In this case, there was a fight between the accused and one Velayuthan Nair.
The deceased came up to them and tried to separate them. Here
Velayuthan was the son-in-law of the deceased. The accused thereupon took
the knife from his waist and hit out at the deceased. The deceased tried to
ward off the blow and was hit in his left forearm. The accused struck again
and this time the blow landed on the chest and the person died. Here the
Court rejected the contentions of the accused and held that the accused had
stabbed an unarmed man who made no threats against him, but was merely
trying to stop the fight. The accused took undue advantage and stabbed
the deceased. So the Court held the accused guilty of Murder.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder
Exception 5 – Consent:
Culpable Homicide is not Murder when;
iii. That such consent was free and voluntary and not given through
fear or misconception of facts.
Culpable Homicide not amounting to
Murder