INTRODUCTION:

To constitute a crime

Physical element – ACTUS REUS

Mental element – MENS REA

ACTUS – Act or action

NON-FACIT – Does not

REUM – Guilty 

NISI MENS SIT REA – Unless there is a presence of guilty mind.

Therefore, the ACTUS NON-FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA definition is INTENT (MENS  rea) + ACT ( ACTUS REUS) = crime.

Therefore, the ACTUS NON FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA definition is INTENT (MENS rea) + ACT ( ACTUS REUS ) = crime.

An act does not make one guilty unless there is a criminal intent. ACTUS NON FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA is the Latin maxim. It is a one of the essential principles in criminal law that means any act to be illegal in nature must be done with the guilty intention of the wrongdoer. Therefore, to make someone guilty the criminal intent of the wrongdoer must be proved. It asserts that a person is only guilty of committing a crime if the conduct is done with the purpose to commit a crime.

• ACTUS REUS and MENS REA  must coincide to create criminal liability.
• The act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention be so.
• There must be a vicious will or criminal intention as well as an unlawful act.
• This maxim can find its importance under section 14 of the Indian evidence act 1872. It States that facts which indicate state of mind.
• Thus this maxim is established to differentiate between intentional and unintentional criminal act so that the quantum of punishment can be decided accordingly.
• In the first scenario guilty mind was present but in second care no intention of causing harm was there. The second act is categorised as self defence and is dealt under section 96 to 106 of the IPC. In the first act the person is guilty of criminal act.

ACTUS NON FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 :

The maxim ACTUS NON FACIT  REUM NISI MENS SIT REA has been integrated into the Indian penal code 1860, In two basic ways,

1. Through express inclusion of the required state of mind (MENS REA) in the definition of an offence.
2. Through general exceptions enumerated in chapter 5 of the IPC, some of which such as mistake of fact, accident, infancy and insanity, deny the existence of men’s rea.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE ACTUS NON-FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA:

IGNORANCE OF LAW:

As discussed in the maxim ignorance of the law is not exhausted , which means every citizen and. Non-citizen of the country is expected to know the laws of the nation. When they are living in that nation or visiting that nation and the ignorance of the law cannot be excusable.

PUBLIC NUISANCE:

A public nuisance is a criminal offence where an act or omission obstructs or harms the general publics/people’s legal rights. It is described as conduct of the person that jeopardises the board public’s interest. In this situation, strict responsibility is applied because the public interest is affected.

STRICT LIABILITY:

The offence where strict liability is imposed does not need to show that the defendant behaved with a guilty mind. Since the conduct of the person is sufficient to establish the crime. The acts which fall in this category are damaging society.

INSANITY:

This maxim is not applicable in the case where the person is insane and committed a criminal act because of the mental illness or immaturity of that person. The main reason behind this a person who is insane could differentiate between what is good and what is evil. Section 84 of the IPC 1860.

VICARIOUS LIABILITY:

In vicarious liability, the master or principal is held liable for the criminal acts of the person who is a servant or employee to the master or principal, when the criminal act is committed in the due course of the period of his service on the job to the master or principal.

CASE LAWS :

1. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI VS STATE OF KERALA:

The supreme court laid emphasis on the principle of criminal jurisprudence stated in criminal law by K.D Gaur and quoted in the judgement by laying emphasis on the Latin maxim ACTUS NON FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA helped in understanding the two components of every crime physical element and a mental element, usually referred to as that ACTUS REUS AND MENS  rea respectively.

CONCLUSION:

This legal maxim, is an integral part of criminal law . It focuses on the fact that an accused may not be guilty unless the act is accompanied by criminal intent. The maxim by laying emphasis on the blameworthy condition of the mind makes us realize that in most cases, an act alone would not convict the accused, the mental state of the accused also plays a primary role.

Article written by 

RADHA BEERE

Reference

https://lawcorner.in/actus-non-facit-reum-nisi-mens-sit-rea-analysis/ 

https://legalkatta.in/actus-non-facit-reum-nisi-mens-sit-rea-legal-maxim/