This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines various crimes and their punishments. The essential elements of a crime under the IPC are as follows:
Actus reus: It means a guilty act or a wrongful deed. It is the first and foremost element of any crime. The act must be voluntary and deliberate.
Mens rea: It means a guilty mind or intention to commit a crime. The offender must have a criminal intent, knowledge or recklessness to commit the crime.
Causation: It means that there must be a causal link between the act and the harm caused. The harm must be the direct result of the act committed by the offender.
Harm: It means that there must be actual harm or loss caused to the victim. The harm can be physical, emotional or financial.
Consent: It means that the victim has given voluntary and informed consent to the act. For instance, in cases of assault, if the victim has given consent, the act may not be considered a crime.
Age: It means that the offender must have attained the age of criminal responsibility. In India, the age of criminal responsibility is 7 years.
Knowledge: It means that the offender must have knowledge of the consequences of their actions. For instance, in cases of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and forgery, the offender must have knowledge of the wrongful act.
Illegality: It means that the act must be illegal or prohibited by law. The IPC provides a list of offenses that are considered illegal.
These are the essential elements of a crime under the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all these elements are present to prove the guilt of the offender.
• Actus Reus:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
Actus reus is a Latin term that refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes a crime. It is a fundamental concept in criminal law, and it is an essential element in proving a criminal offense. In India, Actus Reus is governed by the Indian Penal Code, which is the primary criminal law in the country.
Actus Reus is one of the two components of a crime, the other being mens rea, which refers to the mental state of the accused at the time of committing the offense. In criminal law, both Actus Reus and mens rea must be present for an offense to be considered as a crime.
The Indian Penal Code defines Actus Reus as the wrongful act or omission that constitutes a crime. It means the act or conduct that is prohibited by law and is punishable under the Indian Penal Code. For instance, if a person steals something, the Actus Reus is the physical act of taking the property without the owner’s consent.
In Indian criminal law, Actus Reus can take many forms, including an act, a failure to act, a possession, or an omission. The Indian Penal Code provides several examples of such forms of Actus Reus.
The Indian Penal Code has defined several offenses in which Actus Reus plays a significant role. For example, in the offense of murder, Actus Reus is the act of causing the death of another person. In the offense of theft, Actus Reus is the act of taking or moving someone else’s property without their consent.
One of the essential elements of Actus Reus is causation. In criminal law, causation means that the accused’s conduct must have caused the harm or injury to the victim. The Indian Penal Code requires that the accused’s conduct must be the cause in fact and the legal cause of the harm or injury caused to the victim.
Another important aspect of Actus Reus is that the accused must have the required intention or knowledge to commit the crime. In criminal law, this is known as mens rea, and it is an essential element in proving the accused’s guilt. For instance, in the offense of murder, the accused must have the intention to cause the victim’s death.
In conclusion, Actus Reus is a crucial element in criminal law, and it is essential to prove that a crime has been committed. The Indian Penal Code provides several examples of Actus Reus, and it is important to understand its various forms to determine the accused’s guilt.
• Mens Rea:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
Mens Rea is a Latin term that refers to the mental state of the accused at the time of committing a crime. It is one of the two essential components of a crime, the other being Actus Reus, which refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes the crime. In India, Mens Rea is governed by the Indian Penal Code, which is the primary criminal law in the country.
Mens Rea plays a critical role in determining the accused’s guilt or innocence in a criminal offense. It refers to the accused’s intention or knowledge to commit the crime, and it is an essential element that must be proven to establish criminal liability. In other words, a person cannot be convicted of a crime if they did not have the required mental state or intent to commit the offense.
The Indian Penal Code defines Mens Rea as the mental element or mental state of the accused at the time of committing the crime. It includes knowledge, intention, recklessness, and negligence, and it varies depending on the type of crime committed.
For example, in the offense of murder, the accused must have the intention to cause the victim’s death. The Indian Penal Code defines murder as the act of causing the death of another person with the intention of causing such death or with knowledge that such act is likely to cause death.
Similarly, in the offense of theft, the accused must have the intention to take or move someone else’s property without their consent. The Indian Penal Code defines theft as the act of dishonestly taking or moving someone else’s property with the intention of permanently depriving them of the property.
In addition to intention, Mens Rea also includes recklessness and negligence. Recklessness refers to the accused’s knowledge of the risk involved in their actions, and their willingness to take such risks. Negligence, on the other hand, refers to the accused’s failure to take reasonable care, which results in harm to another person.
The Indian Penal Code provides several examples of crimes that require a specific Mens Rea. For instance, the offense of cheating requires the accused to have the intention to deceive the victim. The offense of culpable homicide requires the accused to have the knowledge that their actions are likely to cause death or grievous hurt.
In conclusion, Mens Rea is a critical element in criminal law, and it is essential to establish the accused’s mental state at the time of committing the offense. The Indian Penal Code defines Mens Rea as the mental element of the offense, which includes knowledge, intention, recklessness, and negligence. To determine criminal liability, both Actus Reus and Mens Rea must be present, and it is essential to understand their various forms to establish the accused’s guilt.
Case Laws:
In R v. Tolson(1889), Mrs. Tolson was married in 1890. In December 1881, her spouse went missing. He had been on a ship that had gone missing at sea, she was told. She also enquired about her husband’s older brother. She married another six years later, assuming her spouse had died. The second husband was completely aware of the circumstances. Her husband returned 11 months after their wedding date. Under Section 57 of the Offences Against Persons Act, 1861, she was charged with bigamy. The reason for this was that she had married for the second time in less than seven years. She did so with the best of intentions. This part was devoid of any mention of the guilty mind. She was given the benefit of the doubt defence because it was reasonable to believe her husband was deceased in the circumstances. She was found not guilty. Honest and reasonable error is on the same level as the absence of the thinking faculty in childhood and the maintenance of that faculty in madness. Unless expressly excluded or by necessary inference, these exclusions apply equally to statutory offences. The actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea was applied by the Court.
Brend v. Wood (1946)
The fundamental rule that applies to criminal cases is actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, as Justice Goddard stated in the case of Brend v. Wood (1946). It is critical for the protection of the subject’s liberty that a court remember that “unless the statute expressly or by necessary implication rules out mens rea as a constituent part of a crime, a defendant should not be found guilty of an offence against the criminal law unless he has a guilty mind.”
Reference:
1. https://swarb.co.uk/brend-v-wood-1946/
2. http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Tolson.php
•Stages of Crime:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) recognizes different stages of a crime, which are as follows:
Intention: The first stage of a crime is intention. This refers to the mental state of the offender before committing the crime. If a person intends to commit a crime and takes a step towards it, then it can be considered as an attempt.
Preparation: The second stage is preparation. This refers to the stage when the offender begins to prepare for the commission of the crime. For example, buying tools or weapons to commit the crime.
Attempt: The third stage is the attempt to commit a crime. If an offender takes a step towards committing the crime but is unable to complete it, then it is considered an attempt.
Commission: The fourth stage is the commission of the crime. This refers to the stage when the offender actually commits the crime.
Abetment: The fifth stage is abetment. This refers to the act of helping or encouraging another person to commit a crime.
Criminal Conspiracy: The sixth stage is criminal conspiracy. This refers to an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime.
All of these stages are recognized under the IPC and can be used to determine the guilt or innocence of an offender.
Case Law:
Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar (1961)
In this case, the appellant was a candidate appearing in an entrance examination of the Patna University for the course of M.A. in English. In his application form, the appellant had provided that he was a graduate and was also teaching in certain schools after his graduation. However, the University, only after dispatching his admit card for the examination, found the information to be forged. He was convicted by the lower court and the High Court under Section 420 read with Section 511 of the Code. Under the appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the contention of the appellant was that it was mere preparation to commit fraud and not an attempt. The Court rejected the argument and held that when the appellant submitted the forged information, it constituted preparation to commit fraud, and when the said forged documents were dispatched, it amounted to an attempt. The court reiterated that an attempt may not be seen as only the penultimate act, rather, it means any act in furtherance of the preparation.
Reference:
1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/487780/
•Abetment of Crime:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
Abetment of crime is a term used in the Indian Penal Code to refer to the act of encouraging, instigating, or assisting someone to commit a crime. The act of abetting a crime is itself considered a criminal offense in India, and is punishable under the law.
The Indian Penal Code defines abetment of a crime under Section 107. According to this section, a person who instigates, or aids, or conspires to commit a crime is said to have abetted the crime. Abetment can take various forms, such as:
Instigation: When a person deliberately provokes or incites someone to commit a crime.
Aid: When a person provides assistance, support or resources to another person to commit a crime.
Conspiracy: When two or more persons agree to commit a crime and take some steps towards its commission.
The Indian Penal Code also specifies different types of abetment, which are as follows:
1.Abetment by instigation
2.Abetment by conspiracy
3.Abetment by aid
Each of these types of abetment is considered a separate offense under the Indian Penal Code and can lead to different levels of punishment, depending on the severity of the crime that has been committed.
For example, if a person instigates someone to commit a murder, and the murder is actually committed, then the person who instigated the murder can be charged with abetment of murder, which is a serious offense under Indian law. Similarly, if a person aids someone in committing a theft, then the person who provided the aid can be charged with abetment of theft.
In conclusion, abetment of crime is a serious offense under Indian law, and individuals who instigate, aid, or conspire to commit a crime can face significant legal consequences.
Case Laws:
In Pramod Shriram Telgote v. State of Maharashtra , it was held that “clear mens rea to commit the offence is a sine qua non for conviction under Section 306 IPC”.
In Channu v. State of Chattisgarh, it was held that “merely because wife committed suicide in matrimonial house, husband and in-laws can’t be charged for abetment to suicide.”
Reference:
1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/50244737/
2. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/40022871/
• Criminal Conspiracy:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
Criminal conspiracy is an offense under the Indian Penal Code that occurs when two or more persons agree to commit a crime, and take some steps towards its commission. The act of conspiring to commit a crime is itself considered a criminal offense in India, even if the crime is not actually committed.
The Indian Penal Code defines criminal conspiracy under Section 120-A. According to this section, when two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy.
The offense of criminal conspiracy requires two or more persons to come together and form a common intention to commit a crime. This common intention can be inferred from the actions of the persons involved, even if they do not expressly state their intention to commit a crime.
In order to establish a charge of criminal conspiracy, the prosecution must prove the following elements:
There was an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime.
The agreement was to do an illegal act or to do a legal act by illegal means.
There was some overt act done in furtherance of the conspiracy.
It is important to note that the overt act does not have to be a criminal act itself. Even an innocent act, if done in furtherance of the conspiracy, can be considered an overt act.
If a person is found guilty of criminal conspiracy, they can be punished with imprisonment for a term of up to two years, or with a fine, or with both. However, if the object of the conspiracy is to commit a serious offense, such as murder or terrorism, then the punishment for criminal conspiracy can be much more severe.
In conclusion, criminal conspiracy is a serious offense under Indian law, and individuals who conspire to commit a crime can face significant legal consequences. It is important to remember that the mere act of conspiring to commit a crime is itself considered a criminal offense, even if the crime is not actually committed.
Case Law:
Kehar Singh and others v. State (Delhi Administration) (1988) SC
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in this case, has held that the most important ingredient of the offence of conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act. Such an illegal act may or may not be done in pursuance of the agreement, but the very agreement is an offence and is punishable.
Reference:
1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/667073/
•Punishments Under Indian Penal code:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the main criminal code of India, which defines various offences and prescribes punishments for them. The punishments under the IPC are broadly categorized as follows:
Death penalty: This is the highest form of punishment under the IPC, which is awarded in rare cases of heinous crimes such as murder, terrorism, and treason.
Imprisonment: Imprisonment is the most common form of punishment under the IPC. It can be either rigorous or simple. Rigorous imprisonment involves hard labour, while simple imprisonment does not.
Fine: A fine is a monetary penalty imposed on the offender for the commission of an offence. The amount of fine varies according to the nature and severity of the offence.
Forfeiture of property: The court may order the forfeiture of property used in the commission of an offence. For example, a vehicle used in a hit-and-run case may be forfeited by the court.
Community service: The court may order the offender to perform community service, such as cleaning public places or working in a hospital, as a form of punishment.
Probation: In certain cases, the court may release the offender on probation, subject to certain conditions such as good behavior and regular reporting to the probation officer.
Restitution: The court may order the offender to compensate the victim for the loss or damage caused by the offence.
Conclusion: It is important to note that the punishment awarded for a particular offence depends on various factors such as the nature and gravity of the offence, the age and gender of the offender, and the circumstances of the case.
•General Explanations Under Indian Penal Code:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the principal criminal code of India that defines various criminal offenses and their punishments. The code was enacted in 1860 and has been amended several times since then.
Here are some general explanations under the Indian Penal Code:
Offense: An offense is an act or omission punishable by law. It can be a crime or a misdemeanor. The IPC defines various offenses, including theft, murder, rape, and fraud.
Criminal Intention: The IPC recognizes the principle of criminal intention, which means that an act is not an offense unless it is done with a criminal intention. A person must have the intent to commit an offense before he can be held liable for it.
Mens Rea: Mens rea is a Latin term that means “guilty mind.” In criminal law, it refers to the mental state of the accused at the time the offense was committed. The IPC recognizes different levels of mens rea, including intention, knowledge, and recklessness.
Actus Reus: Actus reus is a Latin term that means “guilty act.” In criminal law, it refers to the physical act or conduct of the accused that constitutes the offense. Both mens rea and actus reus must be present for an offense to be committed.
Punishment: The IPC prescribes different punishments for different offenses. The punishments can be imprisonment, fine, or both. The severity of the punishment depends on the gravity of the offense and the intention and conduct of the accused.
Cognizable and Non-cognizable Offenses: The IPC recognizes two types of offenses, cognizable and non-cognizable offenses. Cognizable offenses are those offenses in which the police can arrest without a warrant, while non-cognizable offenses require a warrant from a magistrate for arrest.
Compoundable and Non-compoundable Offenses: The IPC also distinguishes between compoundable and non-compoundable offenses. Compoundable offenses are those offenses that can be settled between the accused and the victim, while non-compoundable offenses cannot be settled by compromise.
Overall, the Indian Penal Code provides a framework for defining criminal offenses, determining criminal intent, and prescribing punishments for various crimes.
•General Exceptions under Indian Penal Code:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 recognizes defences in Chapter IV under “General Exceptions”. Section 76 to 106 covers these defences which are based on the presumption that a person is not liable for the crime committed.
Under the Indian Penal Code, there are certain general exceptions which provide legal justification or excuse for otherwise punishable acts. These exceptions are as follows:
Section 76: Act done by a person bound by law – Any act done by a person who is bound by law to do it shall not be considered an offence. For example, a police officer using force to arrest a person who has committed a crime.
Section 77: Act of Judge when acting judicially – Any act done by a judge when acting judicially shall not be considered an offence. For example, a judge passing a sentence on a convict.
Section 78: Act done pursuant to the judgment or order of a court – Any act done pursuant to the judgment or order of a court shall not be considered an offence. For example, a police officer seizing the property of a person under a court order.
Section 79: Act done by a person justified by necessity – Any act done by a person who is justified by necessity shall not be considered an offence. For example, a doctor performing a surgery without the consent of the patient in an emergency situation.
Section 80: Act done by a person in a state of intoxication – Any act done by a person in a state of intoxication shall not be considered an offence if the person did not know that the act was likely to cause harm. For example, a person driving a car under the influence of alcohol and causing an accident.
Section 81: Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm – Any act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent and to prevent other harm shall not be considered an offence. For example, a person breaking into a house to rescue a child from a fire.
Section 82: Act of a child under seven years of age – Any act done by a child under seven years of age shall not be considered an offence. For example, a child taking a toy from another child.
It is important to note that these general exceptions are subject to certain limitations and conditions, and they do not provide a complete defence against all criminal charges.
Object of Chapter IV:
Every offence is not absolute, they have certain exceptions. When IPC was drafted, it was assumed that there were no exceptions in criminal cases which were a major loophole. So a separate Chapter IV was introduced by the makers of the Code applicable to the entire concept.
•Criminal consequences of Sex determination test in india penal code:
This Article has been written by Ubaid Mufeed Wani, a 2nd year LLB Hons. Student from School of Law, University of Kashmir.
In India, sex determination tests are illegal under the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act), which was amended in 2003 to strengthen the legal framework against this practice.
The PCPNDT Act prohibits the use of any technology or technique for determining the sex of a fetus during pregnancy. It also prohibits any advertising of such technology or technique, and any act of commission or omission that may aid or abet sex selection.
Violation of the PCPNDT Act can result in criminal consequences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which includes imprisonment and fines. Some of the criminal consequences of sex determination tests under the IPC are:
Section 312: Causing miscarriage: This section makes it a criminal offense to cause a miscarriage by any means. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of up to three years and/or a fine.
Section 313: Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent: This section makes it a criminal offense to cause a miscarriage without the woman’s consent. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of up to seven years and/or a fine.
Section 315: Act done with intent to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth: This section makes it a criminal offense to do any act with the intention of preventing a child from being born alive or causing it to die after birth. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of up to ten years and/or a fine.
Section 316: Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide: This section makes it a criminal offense to cause the death of a quick unborn child (i.e., a fetus that has developed to a point where it can move in the womb) by an act amounting to culpable homicide. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of up to ten years and/or a fine.
Section 317: Exposure and abandonment of child under twelve years, by parent or person having care of it: This section makes it a criminal offense to expose or abandon a child under the age of twelve years by a parent or person having care of it. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of up to seven years and/or a fine.
It is important to note that the PCPNDT Act and the IPC criminalize both the act of sex determination and the act of sex-selective abortion. Any person found guilty of violating these laws can face severe criminal consequences.
Case Law:
Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2008
The following issues were raised in this case for consideration:
Does Section 28 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 permit a court to find a violation of the Act upon receipt of a complaint from any official authorised by the appropriate authorities to file such a complaint?
Does the proviso to subsection (3) of Section 4 of the PNDT Act mandate that the complaint should include specific claims about the violation of Sections 5 and 6 of the Act?
Is it the authority’s responsibility to establish that there was a contravention of the provisions of Section 5 or 6 of the Act
Judgment:
A court may take notice of an offence under the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, on a complaint submitted by any official authorised in that regard by the relevant authorities, according to Section 28 of the PNDT Act.
The proviso to Section 4(3) of the PNDT Act does not mandate that the complaint alleging accuracy or inadequacy in preserving records in the required way should also contain an accusation of violating Sections 5 or 6 of the PNDT Act.
The burden of proving a violation of Sections 5 or 6 does not fall on the prosecution in a case based on allegations of a shortcoming or error in maintaining the record in the manner specified by sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the PNDT Act.
Reference:
1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1705767/
Aishwarya Says:
Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening