The document summarizes criminal law concepts related to assault, wrongful restraint, grievous hurt, and murder. It defines key terms like assault, grievous hurt, wrongful restraint, and culpable homicide. It also discusses related legal cases and provides punishments for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code.
1) The document discusses the distinction between culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. Culpable homicide is a broad category that includes murder, but not all culpable homicides are considered murder.
2) For an offense to qualify as murder, the death must be caused unlawfully with the intention to kill or cause serious injury that could likely cause death, or with the knowledge that the act could immediately cause death or serious injury.
3) Culpable homicide only requires unlawfully causing death with the intention to kill or cause likely injury, or with knowledge the act was likely to cause death. Murder requires a higher level of intent or knowledge of likely harm.
This document defines homicide and discusses the different types of homicide offenses, including murder and manslaughter. It notes that manslaughter can be committed in three ways: 1) with intent for murder but a partial defense applies, 2) through grossly negligent conduct that results in death, or 3) through an unlawful and dangerous act that results in death. Murder requires an unlawful killing with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. Some killings may be lawful, such as in self-defense. There are also partial defenses to murder, such as diminished responsibility, that can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter if successfully argued.
The document discusses the differences between murder and culpable homicide under Indian law. It examines the exceptions under Section 300 that may reduce a murder charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. These exceptions include provocation, exceeding the right of private defense, a public servant exceeding their powers, sudden fight, and consent. The document analyzes several court cases to illustrate how the exceptions have been applied in practice and the criteria courts consider in determining whether an exception applies.
This document defines and explains the different types of qatl (homicide) under Pakistani law:
1. Qatl-e-Amd involves intentionally causing death or bodily injury that results in death. It is punishable by death (qisas) or imprisonment.
2. Qatl Shibh-i-Amd involves intentionally causing harm but death results from an act not likely to cause death. It is punishable by diyat (financial compensation) and imprisonment.
3. Qatl-i-Khata involves accidentally causing death without intent to harm through mistake of fact or act. It is punishable by diyat and possible imprisonment depending on the circumstances.
4
This document summarizes criminal offenses against persons, including definitions, elements, and statutes regarding assault, battery, stalking, hazing, reckless endangerment, rape, and sexual battery. It discusses the evolution of laws from common law to modern statutes. For example, it notes that all states now define stalking as a crime and that legislative reforms have expanded definitions of rape to be gender-neutral and include other forms of nonconsensual penetration.
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under the Indian Penal Code. It defines culpable homicide as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death. The key ingredients of culpable homicide are discussed, including causing the death of a human by doing an act with intention to cause death or injury likely to cause death. Murder is defined as culpable homicide committed with the intention to cause death. Exceptions to murder and illustrations of both offenses are provided. The document distinguishes between culpable homicide and murder and notes their respective punishments under the Indian Penal Code.
1) The document discusses the distinction between culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. Culpable homicide is a broad category that includes murder, but not all culpable homicides are considered murder.
2) For an offense to qualify as murder, the death must be caused unlawfully with the intention to kill or cause serious injury that could likely cause death, or with the knowledge that the act could immediately cause death or serious injury.
3) Culpable homicide only requires unlawfully causing death with the intention to kill or cause likely injury, or with knowledge the act was likely to cause death. Murder requires a higher level of intent or knowledge of likely harm.
This document defines homicide and discusses the different types of homicide offenses, including murder and manslaughter. It notes that manslaughter can be committed in three ways: 1) with intent for murder but a partial defense applies, 2) through grossly negligent conduct that results in death, or 3) through an unlawful and dangerous act that results in death. Murder requires an unlawful killing with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. Some killings may be lawful, such as in self-defense. There are also partial defenses to murder, such as diminished responsibility, that can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter if successfully argued.
The document discusses the differences between murder and culpable homicide under Indian law. It examines the exceptions under Section 300 that may reduce a murder charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. These exceptions include provocation, exceeding the right of private defense, a public servant exceeding their powers, sudden fight, and consent. The document analyzes several court cases to illustrate how the exceptions have been applied in practice and the criteria courts consider in determining whether an exception applies.
This document defines and explains the different types of qatl (homicide) under Pakistani law:
1. Qatl-e-Amd involves intentionally causing death or bodily injury that results in death. It is punishable by death (qisas) or imprisonment.
2. Qatl Shibh-i-Amd involves intentionally causing harm but death results from an act not likely to cause death. It is punishable by diyat (financial compensation) and imprisonment.
3. Qatl-i-Khata involves accidentally causing death without intent to harm through mistake of fact or act. It is punishable by diyat and possible imprisonment depending on the circumstances.
4
This document summarizes criminal offenses against persons, including definitions, elements, and statutes regarding assault, battery, stalking, hazing, reckless endangerment, rape, and sexual battery. It discusses the evolution of laws from common law to modern statutes. For example, it notes that all states now define stalking as a crime and that legislative reforms have expanded definitions of rape to be gender-neutral and include other forms of nonconsensual penetration.
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under the Indian Penal Code. It defines culpable homicide as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death. The key ingredients of culpable homicide are discussed, including causing the death of a human by doing an act with intention to cause death or injury likely to cause death. Murder is defined as culpable homicide committed with the intention to cause death. Exceptions to murder and illustrations of both offenses are provided. The document distinguishes between culpable homicide and murder and notes their respective punishments under the Indian Penal Code.
Culpable homicide is the unlawful killing of a human being without intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm. It becomes murder when committed with the direct intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. The document outlines the key elements that distinguish culpable homicide from murder under Indian penal code, including intentionality, knowledge of likely death, and presence of grave and sudden provocation or exercise of private defense. It also provides illustrations of cases that fall under culpable homicide but not murder.
This document discusses the laws around culpable homicide and murder in India according to sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 299 defines culpable homicide as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. Section 300 defines murder as culpable homicide committed with the intention of causing death or bodily injury known to likely cause death, or with the intention of causing bodily injury sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
The key differences between culpable homicide and murder are the intention or knowledge of the offender. Culpable homicide does not require the intention to cause death, while murder
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. It begins by noting that murder accounts for 59% of convictions under the Indian Penal Code. It then examines the origins and meanings of homicide and murder from Latin and Old French roots. The key differences between culpable homicide and murder are outlined, with murder requiring intent to cause death or knowledge that an act could likely cause death, while culpable homicide has a broader scope. Punishments are also specified under sections 302 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Case examples are provided to help distinguish between the two offenses.
This document provides an overview of offenses affecting the human body under Indian law. It defines and discusses crimes such as culpable homicide, murder, hurt, grievous hurt, kidnapping, and rape. For each offense, it outlines the relevant sections of Indian law and provides definitions and explanations of key terms as well as punishments prescribed. The document was written by Vandana Chandwani, an LLB student, for a class on information and communications technology related to these types of offenses under Indian law.
This chapter discusses common law and modern statutory definitions of criminal homicide offenses in Tennessee. At common law, murder required an unlawful killing with malice aforethought, while manslaughter involved an unlawful killing without malice. Modern statutes in Tennessee classify homicide into degrees of murder, voluntary/involuntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, reckless homicide, and criminally negligent homicide, with varying penalties. The chapter also examines legal issues regarding suicide, abortion, removal of life support, and acts resulting in fetal death.
The document summarizes various sections of Indian penal code related to offences against the human body. It discusses the essential elements of culpable homicide, murder, exceptions to murder like grave and sudden provocation. It also discusses cases related to dowry death, hurt, wrongful restraint, kidnapping, abduction and assault. In summary, the document provides an overview of key laws around causing bodily harm and restricting personal liberty as defined in the Indian penal code.
culpable homicide, murder and grievous hurtbalaji singh
This document provides an overview of key concepts in Indian criminal law relating to homicide. It defines homicide and distinguishes between lawful and unlawful homicide. It describes the offenses of culpable homicide, murder, and causing death by negligence under Sections 299-304A of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide is defined and the elements are outlined. The exceptions and degrees of murder are explained. Other offenses such as attempt to murder and abetment of suicide are also briefly mentioned. The document also discusses the definition and types of hurt under the Code.
Law Relating to Culpable Homicide & Murder in India.Nilendra Kumar
This document provides an overview of homicide laws in India. It defines different types of homicide such as culpable homicide, murder, and exceptions. Culpable homicide is the killing of a human being without intent to cause death. Murder is a more serious form requiring intent to kill. Lawful homicide includes cases done to uphold the law or in self-defense. Unlawful types include culpable homicide, murder, suicide and homicide by negligent acts. The key aspects of murder under IPC Section 300 are discussed along with illustrations.
The document discusses various legal defences that can be used in criminal cases. It outlines 15+ defences and provides details on defences related to mental states like automatism and mental disorder. It also explains justifications such as self-defence, battered women's syndrome, defence of dwelling, necessity, compulsion/duress, and provocation. The document provides case examples and discusses how intoxication and Aboriginal treaty rights can also be used as defences.
The document discusses three homicide schemes - common law, Pennsylvania, and the Model Penal Code. It provides definitions and examples of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, and related terms. It also summarizes two court cases - State v. Guthrie and the differing definitions of "deliberate and premeditated" from Schrader and Morrin. The last section discusses aggravating and mitigating circumstances in determining sentencing for first-degree murder under Arizona law.
This document provides information about concealed carry laws and self-defense training. It begins with instructors' names and safety instructions. It then discusses the human right to self-defense and statistics on crime rates. Subsequent sections cover concealed carry laws and permits, recommended firearms and ammunition for self-defense, what to do and say if forced to use a firearm to defend yourself, and the physical and psychological impacts of using lethal force.
This document discusses homicide, suicide, and accidents. It explains that homicide refers to one human killing another and may be punished severely. A homicide crime scene requires careful examination to determine what occurred. Suicide is intentionally causing one's own death and also requires a careful investigation to determine the cause and manner of death. Accidental deaths also fall under the jurisdiction of forensic pathologists and coroners and determining whether a death was suicide, homicide or accidental can be challenging.
Joe is charged with first degree murder for killing his former boss Jerry. Joe claims he was too drunk to have the mental state needed for murder. Case law in Virginia establishes that voluntary intoxication can negate premeditation needed for first degree murder but not reduce second degree murder to manslaughter. While Joe may be able to avoid a first degree conviction by arguing lack of premeditation due to intoxication, he cannot use intoxication to reduce a second degree murder charge to manslaughter. Joe should at least be convicted of second degree murder.
Self Defence, Defence of Another and Prevention of a Crime Lectureshummi
Here are the key points from the recap test in bullet points:
- Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008
- Section 76
- Williams, Clegg, Martin, Drunken Mistake, A-G Reference
- Brief descriptions of the 5 cases
- Determining whether force is necessary, pre-emptive strike, excessive force
The document discusses hurt and grievous hurt offenses under Sections 319 to 338 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860. It defines hurt and grievous hurt and outlines various voluntarily caused offenses and their corresponding punishments. The objective is to protect people from injury and allow victims support under the Code. While the Code deters revenge attacks, diseases transmitted are not clearly addressed. Suggestions include a separate section for offenses leading to death. In conclusion, the punishments follow Newton's third law of equal and opposite reactions.
This document discusses the legal definition and elements of involuntary manslaughter in criminal law. It can be committed through unlawful act manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, or reckless manslaughter. Unlawful act manslaughter involves an unlawful and dangerous act that causes death, even if the defendant did not intend to kill or harm. Gross negligence manslaughter involves a breach of duty of care that causes death and amounts to gross negligence. The sentence for involuntary manslaughter can range from life imprisonment to a non-custodial sentence depending on the judge's decision.
Criminal Law II - General Defences (Part 2)intnmsrh
The document summarizes general defences in criminal law, including consent, duress, and private defence.
Consent is not a defence if given under fear, misconception, unsoundness of mind, or by a minor. Duress is a defence for threats of instant death that reasonably cause apprehension, but not if the accused voluntarily exposed themselves to threats.
Private defence must be used to avert an impending danger, commences with reasonable apprehension of harm, and ends when the apprehension stops. More harm than necessary cannot be inflicted, and recourse to authorities must be attempted if possible.
This document provides definitions and ingredients for the offenses of culpable homicide and murder under Sections 299 and 300 of the Penal Code of Malaysia.
It begins by defining culpable homicide according to Section 299 as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing bodily injury likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. The three key mental elements (mens rea) are then explained.
The document then defines murder according to Section 300 and explains the four circumstances that constitute murder. It provides illustrations for each circumstance. Key court cases are referenced to further explain the definitions and mental elements.
The document also discusses the punishments for
The document discusses the legal concept of mens rea, or guilty mind, which is required for criminal liability. It covers several key aspects of mens rea, including:
- Intention, which can be direct (foreseeing and intending the consequences) or oblique (intending one consequence but foreseeing and being liable for another).
- The development of the test for determining oblique intent and liability for unintended consequences over several cases, culminating in the "virtual certainty" test in R v Woollin.
- Types of mens rea like intention and how scenarios can illustrate direct versus oblique intent.
Murder accounts for 59% of total convictions under the Indian Penal Code. Determining criminal intent remains a challenge for the judiciary. This project aims to study the differences between culpable homicide and murder. Culpable homicide is defined as causing death but without intention, while murder involves the intentional causing of death or bodily harm known to likely cause death. The key differences are the mental elements involved - murder involves intent to kill or cause serious injury, while culpable homicide does not. Understanding the distinction between these two crimes is important for determining appropriate punishment under Indian law.
This document provides profiles of several notorious UK serial killers:
1. Peter Sutcliffe (The Yorkshire Ripper) murdered 13 women in the late 1970s and attacked 7 others. He claimed to hear voices telling him to kill prostitutes.
2. Fred and Rose West tortured, sexually abused, and murdered at least 12 people in Gloucester in the 1970s-80s. Fred West killed himself in prison in 1995 while awaiting trial. Rose West was convicted of 10 murders.
3. Harold Shipman is considered the most prolific serial killer in UK history, having been found responsible for the deaths of at least 215 patients via lethal injections as their family doctor over 23 years. He hanged himself
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. It begins by providing background on the definitions and origins of the terms "homicide" and "murder". It then examines the key differences between culpable homicide and murder according to Sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide involves acting with the intention to cause death or injury, while murder involves additional conditions like knowledge of an act's dangerous nature. The document also reviews the punishments for culpable homicide under Section 304 and for murder under Section 302.
Culpable homicide is the unlawful killing of a human being without intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm. It becomes murder when committed with the direct intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. The document outlines the key elements that distinguish culpable homicide from murder under Indian penal code, including intentionality, knowledge of likely death, and presence of grave and sudden provocation or exercise of private defense. It also provides illustrations of cases that fall under culpable homicide but not murder.
This document discusses the laws around culpable homicide and murder in India according to sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 299 defines culpable homicide as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. Section 300 defines murder as culpable homicide committed with the intention of causing death or bodily injury known to likely cause death, or with the intention of causing bodily injury sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
The key differences between culpable homicide and murder are the intention or knowledge of the offender. Culpable homicide does not require the intention to cause death, while murder
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. It begins by noting that murder accounts for 59% of convictions under the Indian Penal Code. It then examines the origins and meanings of homicide and murder from Latin and Old French roots. The key differences between culpable homicide and murder are outlined, with murder requiring intent to cause death or knowledge that an act could likely cause death, while culpable homicide has a broader scope. Punishments are also specified under sections 302 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Case examples are provided to help distinguish between the two offenses.
This document provides an overview of offenses affecting the human body under Indian law. It defines and discusses crimes such as culpable homicide, murder, hurt, grievous hurt, kidnapping, and rape. For each offense, it outlines the relevant sections of Indian law and provides definitions and explanations of key terms as well as punishments prescribed. The document was written by Vandana Chandwani, an LLB student, for a class on information and communications technology related to these types of offenses under Indian law.
This chapter discusses common law and modern statutory definitions of criminal homicide offenses in Tennessee. At common law, murder required an unlawful killing with malice aforethought, while manslaughter involved an unlawful killing without malice. Modern statutes in Tennessee classify homicide into degrees of murder, voluntary/involuntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, reckless homicide, and criminally negligent homicide, with varying penalties. The chapter also examines legal issues regarding suicide, abortion, removal of life support, and acts resulting in fetal death.
The document summarizes various sections of Indian penal code related to offences against the human body. It discusses the essential elements of culpable homicide, murder, exceptions to murder like grave and sudden provocation. It also discusses cases related to dowry death, hurt, wrongful restraint, kidnapping, abduction and assault. In summary, the document provides an overview of key laws around causing bodily harm and restricting personal liberty as defined in the Indian penal code.
culpable homicide, murder and grievous hurtbalaji singh
This document provides an overview of key concepts in Indian criminal law relating to homicide. It defines homicide and distinguishes between lawful and unlawful homicide. It describes the offenses of culpable homicide, murder, and causing death by negligence under Sections 299-304A of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide is defined and the elements are outlined. The exceptions and degrees of murder are explained. Other offenses such as attempt to murder and abetment of suicide are also briefly mentioned. The document also discusses the definition and types of hurt under the Code.
Law Relating to Culpable Homicide & Murder in India.Nilendra Kumar
This document provides an overview of homicide laws in India. It defines different types of homicide such as culpable homicide, murder, and exceptions. Culpable homicide is the killing of a human being without intent to cause death. Murder is a more serious form requiring intent to kill. Lawful homicide includes cases done to uphold the law or in self-defense. Unlawful types include culpable homicide, murder, suicide and homicide by negligent acts. The key aspects of murder under IPC Section 300 are discussed along with illustrations.
The document discusses various legal defences that can be used in criminal cases. It outlines 15+ defences and provides details on defences related to mental states like automatism and mental disorder. It also explains justifications such as self-defence, battered women's syndrome, defence of dwelling, necessity, compulsion/duress, and provocation. The document provides case examples and discusses how intoxication and Aboriginal treaty rights can also be used as defences.
The document discusses three homicide schemes - common law, Pennsylvania, and the Model Penal Code. It provides definitions and examples of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, and related terms. It also summarizes two court cases - State v. Guthrie and the differing definitions of "deliberate and premeditated" from Schrader and Morrin. The last section discusses aggravating and mitigating circumstances in determining sentencing for first-degree murder under Arizona law.
This document provides information about concealed carry laws and self-defense training. It begins with instructors' names and safety instructions. It then discusses the human right to self-defense and statistics on crime rates. Subsequent sections cover concealed carry laws and permits, recommended firearms and ammunition for self-defense, what to do and say if forced to use a firearm to defend yourself, and the physical and psychological impacts of using lethal force.
This document discusses homicide, suicide, and accidents. It explains that homicide refers to one human killing another and may be punished severely. A homicide crime scene requires careful examination to determine what occurred. Suicide is intentionally causing one's own death and also requires a careful investigation to determine the cause and manner of death. Accidental deaths also fall under the jurisdiction of forensic pathologists and coroners and determining whether a death was suicide, homicide or accidental can be challenging.
Joe is charged with first degree murder for killing his former boss Jerry. Joe claims he was too drunk to have the mental state needed for murder. Case law in Virginia establishes that voluntary intoxication can negate premeditation needed for first degree murder but not reduce second degree murder to manslaughter. While Joe may be able to avoid a first degree conviction by arguing lack of premeditation due to intoxication, he cannot use intoxication to reduce a second degree murder charge to manslaughter. Joe should at least be convicted of second degree murder.
Self Defence, Defence of Another and Prevention of a Crime Lectureshummi
Here are the key points from the recap test in bullet points:
- Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008
- Section 76
- Williams, Clegg, Martin, Drunken Mistake, A-G Reference
- Brief descriptions of the 5 cases
- Determining whether force is necessary, pre-emptive strike, excessive force
The document discusses hurt and grievous hurt offenses under Sections 319 to 338 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860. It defines hurt and grievous hurt and outlines various voluntarily caused offenses and their corresponding punishments. The objective is to protect people from injury and allow victims support under the Code. While the Code deters revenge attacks, diseases transmitted are not clearly addressed. Suggestions include a separate section for offenses leading to death. In conclusion, the punishments follow Newton's third law of equal and opposite reactions.
This document discusses the legal definition and elements of involuntary manslaughter in criminal law. It can be committed through unlawful act manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, or reckless manslaughter. Unlawful act manslaughter involves an unlawful and dangerous act that causes death, even if the defendant did not intend to kill or harm. Gross negligence manslaughter involves a breach of duty of care that causes death and amounts to gross negligence. The sentence for involuntary manslaughter can range from life imprisonment to a non-custodial sentence depending on the judge's decision.
Criminal Law II - General Defences (Part 2)intnmsrh
The document summarizes general defences in criminal law, including consent, duress, and private defence.
Consent is not a defence if given under fear, misconception, unsoundness of mind, or by a minor. Duress is a defence for threats of instant death that reasonably cause apprehension, but not if the accused voluntarily exposed themselves to threats.
Private defence must be used to avert an impending danger, commences with reasonable apprehension of harm, and ends when the apprehension stops. More harm than necessary cannot be inflicted, and recourse to authorities must be attempted if possible.
This document provides definitions and ingredients for the offenses of culpable homicide and murder under Sections 299 and 300 of the Penal Code of Malaysia.
It begins by defining culpable homicide according to Section 299 as causing death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing bodily injury likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. The three key mental elements (mens rea) are then explained.
The document then defines murder according to Section 300 and explains the four circumstances that constitute murder. It provides illustrations for each circumstance. Key court cases are referenced to further explain the definitions and mental elements.
The document also discusses the punishments for
The document discusses the legal concept of mens rea, or guilty mind, which is required for criminal liability. It covers several key aspects of mens rea, including:
- Intention, which can be direct (foreseeing and intending the consequences) or oblique (intending one consequence but foreseeing and being liable for another).
- The development of the test for determining oblique intent and liability for unintended consequences over several cases, culminating in the "virtual certainty" test in R v Woollin.
- Types of mens rea like intention and how scenarios can illustrate direct versus oblique intent.
Murder accounts for 59% of total convictions under the Indian Penal Code. Determining criminal intent remains a challenge for the judiciary. This project aims to study the differences between culpable homicide and murder. Culpable homicide is defined as causing death but without intention, while murder involves the intentional causing of death or bodily harm known to likely cause death. The key differences are the mental elements involved - murder involves intent to kill or cause serious injury, while culpable homicide does not. Understanding the distinction between these two crimes is important for determining appropriate punishment under Indian law.
This document provides profiles of several notorious UK serial killers:
1. Peter Sutcliffe (The Yorkshire Ripper) murdered 13 women in the late 1970s and attacked 7 others. He claimed to hear voices telling him to kill prostitutes.
2. Fred and Rose West tortured, sexually abused, and murdered at least 12 people in Gloucester in the 1970s-80s. Fred West killed himself in prison in 1995 while awaiting trial. Rose West was convicted of 10 murders.
3. Harold Shipman is considered the most prolific serial killer in UK history, having been found responsible for the deaths of at least 215 patients via lethal injections as their family doctor over 23 years. He hanged himself
This document discusses culpable homicide and murder under Indian law. It begins by providing background on the definitions and origins of the terms "homicide" and "murder". It then examines the key differences between culpable homicide and murder according to Sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide involves acting with the intention to cause death or injury, while murder involves additional conditions like knowledge of an act's dangerous nature. The document also reviews the punishments for culpable homicide under Section 304 and for murder under Section 302.
Last week we started discussing the requirements of criminal liability
We made the point that a crime is made up of two elements, namely a prohibited act or omission, i.e. the physical element – captured in the Latin phrase actus reus, and a prohibited mental state with which the particular act or omission is done, captured in the Latin phrase, mens rea – the mens must be rea before criminal liability can be established
We noted that as a general rule, the two elements must coincide in respect of the same event for the act to amount to a crime
This dual requirement of criminal liability is captured in the Latin maxim Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea – that is, an act does not make a man a criminal unless the mind be guilty We also noted that the sometimes, the law dispenses with the requirement mental element, making such an act a strict liability offence
We stressed that the actus reus may be an act, or an act together with the surrounding circumstances, or an omission to act when required to do so
The point was also made that the mental element differs from offense to offense – in some situations it is intentional conduct that is proscribed, in other cases, it is knowledge of the unlawfulness of the conduct
We broke off at the point where we were discussing intention under section 11 as a form of mens rea
Here, the concept of direct intent under section 11(1) was explained in the light of the rebuttable presumption that a man intends the natural and probable consequences of his actions
Then the concept of oblique intent under section 11(2) was also explained – this where a person engages in conduct for a particular purpose and the means chosen causes other effects as well – here, the accused is not excused from liability if his act achieves an undesired consequence, as long as the undesired consequence was foreseeable at the time the act was committed
So as the illustration under section 11(2) goes, if A, for the purpose of causing the miscarriage of B, administers to B a drug which A knows to be dangerous to life, it is immaterial that A earnestly desires to avoid causing B’s death, and uses every precaution to avoid causing it
Now lets proceed to discuss other forms of intent under section 11
Sometimes a person engages in criminal conduct against a crowd or an assembly of people without really intending to harm a particular person, and a member of the group is harmed thereby
Here, the intention is indeterminate in respect of who would be victimized or the eventual victim
1
This document discusses the differences between murder, manslaughter, and infanticide under Canadian law. It defines murder as the intentional unlawful killing of another person or inflicting harm knowing it could cause death. There are two degrees of murder - first-degree includes premeditated killing or killing during certain other crimes, while second-degree is any murder that is not first-degree. Manslaughter is an unlawful killing without intent to cause death. The consequences for murder include life imprisonment with parole ineligibility periods ranging from 10-25 years depending on the degree. Hiring an experienced criminal defense attorney can help in understanding the charges and developing a strong defense.
This document discusses the differences between murder, manslaughter, and infanticide under Canadian law. It defines murder as the intentional unlawful killing of another person or inflicting harm knowing it could cause death. There are two degrees of murder - first-degree includes premeditated killing or killing during certain other crimes, while second-degree is any murder that is not first-degree. Manslaughter is an unlawful killing without intent to cause death, such as from provocation. Penalties for murder include life imprisonment with parole ineligibility periods of 10-25 years, while manslaughter penalties vary but can include life imprisonment. The document advises speaking with a criminal lawyer if facing charges for causing death.
The document discusses the concept of mens rea in criminal law. It begins by defining mens rea as the "guilty mind" or voluntary choice to commit an offense. It then discusses different types of mens rea, including direct intent, oblique intent, and recklessness. It analyzes several important cases that helped develop the tests for determining these mental states, such as R v Mohan, R v Woollin, and R v Caldwell. The document also discusses related concepts like transferred intent and the requirement that the actus reus and mens rea coincide for liability. Overall, the document provides a detailed overview of the development of mens rea in English criminal law.
The document outlines various criminal offences in Canada, including their elements and classifications. It discusses violent offences like homicide, murder, manslaughter, and assault. It also covers sexual assault and identifies three levels based on severity of the crime. Motor vehicle offences in the Criminal Code like dangerous operation and hit-and-run are explained. Impaired driving laws and penalties for exceeding blood alcohol limits while operating a vehicle are also summarized.
This document provides a summary of a lecture on fatal offences, including murder and manslaughter. It recaps the elements of a crime as actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). It then defines fatal offences as those involving killing the victim, specifically murder and manslaughter. Murder requires an unlawful killing with malice aforethought, defined as intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. Manslaughter is unlawful killing without malice aforethought. Voluntary manslaughter is a partial defense to murder where there is provocation or diminished responsibility. Involuntary manslaughter involves death caused without intent.
The document discusses various criminal offences in Canada, including violent crimes, offences against the person, and motor vehicle offences. It explains the classification of offences as summary, indictable or hybrid and the different levels of offences like assault. Specific offences covered include homicide (with definitions of murder and manslaughter), sexual assault, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, hit and run accidents, and impaired driving. Maximum penalties for each offence are provided.
This document discusses the legal definition and elements of involuntary manslaughter in the UK. It is defined as an unlawful killing without intent, distinguished from murder by the lack of intent. The sentence can range from life imprisonment to a non-custodial sentence depending on the judge's view of the case. There are three main ways involuntary manslaughter can occur: unlawful act manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, and reckless manslaughter. Unlawful act manslaughter, also called constructive manslaughter, involves doing a dangerous unlawful act that results in death, even if unintended. The unlawful act must be an objective danger and directly cause the death. Case law examples explore what constitutes a dangerous unlawful act and how proximate the causation must be.
This document discusses the law of attempt in criminal cases under Malaysian law. It begins by explaining the rationale for punishing attempts and outlining the 4 stages of a crime. It then discusses the elements of an attempt, including the mens rea requirement of intention and the actus reus requirement that the act must be proximate to completing the crime. The document analyzes several cases that help define what constitutes an attempt in terms of both the mental and physical elements. It concludes by discussing how attempt is applied to specific crimes like murder, culpable homicide, and rape.
Notes on capital punishment content package (2013)pepperleejy
The document discusses various arguments for and against capital punishment. It provides statistics on the global trend towards abolition of the death penalty, with the number of retentionist countries declining from 16 in 1977 to 21 in 2011. It also examines arguments related to retribution, deterrence, the possibility of executing innocent people, and the distinction between retribution and revenge. Concerns about wrongful convictions due to factors like ineffective legal defense, coerced confessions, unreliable eyewitnesses, and lack of forensic evidence are presented.
Murder requires the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. There are two types of intent that can demonstrate malice: direct intent to kill or cause serious harm, or indirect/oblique intent where death or serious injury were foreseeable consequences of the defendant's actions. The defendant's actions must also be both the factual and legal cause of death. There are several defenses that can reduce murder to manslaughter, including diminished responsibility, loss of self-control due to provocation, insanity per the M'Naghten rules, and automatism. Intoxication can prevent formation of intent, and unlawful act manslaughter involves death resulting from a dangerous criminal act. Gross negligence manslaughter involves owed duty of care,
This document discusses crimes against persons under Philippine law. It defines and distinguishes between different crimes such as parricide, murder, homicide, infanticide, abortion, physical injuries, rape, and recent laws passed to address sexual harassment and child abuse. For crimes resulting in death, the key differences are intent to kill and the relationship between the victim and offender. For non-fatal crimes, the document outlines how the level of injury (slight, less serious, serious) determines the applicable crime. It provides elements and other details to distinguish between similar crimes like rape, statutory rape, and seduction.
Law of Evidence I - Hearsay Notes (Studiouseason)Studious Season
This document discusses the law on hearsay evidence in Malaysia. It defines hearsay as out-of-court statements used to prove the truth of their contents. Hearsay is generally inadmissible due to reliability issues, unless it falls under an exception. The document examines what constitutes hearsay through various cases, and exceptions where hearsay may be admissible, such as statements of unavailable witnesses or dying declarations.
The document discusses the strength of qarinah (circumstantial evidence) in Syariah court cases from the perspectives of relevance and admissibility. It states that qarinah can be ruled as relevant and admissible if presented in its strongest form by looking at each piece of evidence individually and collectively. A strong qarinah allows the court to convict those accused of hudud and qisas offenses. DNA evidence is used as an example, where it becomes relevant once corroborated by other evidence. To maintain strength, the DNA sampling process must be carefully documented. The conclusion is that qarinah is a legitimate form of evidence, and a strong qarinah can convict those accused of serious crimes
This receipt is for Muhammad Noah bin Rasyid's semi-annual property tax payment of RM96 for his condominium unit located at Unit 8A-2-10, PlatinumLake View Condominium for the period of July to December. The payment was made through Maybank on July 30th, 2020.
This document provides a summary of a Federal Court of Malaysia case involving four individuals who were convicted of murder. The key points are:
1) Circumstantial evidence showed that four victims met their deaths at the defendant's farm, including evidence that led to the discovery of human remains and personal items.
2) The trial court convicted all four defendants, but the Court of Appeal rejected some evidence. The Federal Court then analyzed various evidence and testimony in detail.
3) The Federal Court ultimately dismissed the appeals of three defendants, but allowed the appeal of the third defendant. It found some evidence to be admissible and upheld the credibility of a key witness, while also identifying errors made by the lower courts.
The plaintiff commenced a defamation suit against the defendant based on statements in three letters. The parties agreed to include the letters in Part A of the agreed bundle of documents. The Judicial Commissioner found the defendant liable and awarded damages to the plaintiff. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that including the letters in Part A only indicated agreement on the contents, not the truth of the statements. The plaintiff was not estopped from disputing the truth. However, the damages award was reduced from RM5 million to RM50,000. The majority found the defendant liable but the quantum excessive, while the dissenting judge found the plaintiff's suit should have been dismissed.
Bil cukai taksiran untuk Muhammad Noah BinRasyid untuk unit 8A-2-10 di PlatinumLake View Condominium. Nilai taksiran RM1,920 dengan cukai tahunan RM192 yang perlu dibayar sebelum 30 Julai 2020 ke Majlis Perbandaran Seremban. Cukai taksiran lewat akan dikenakan denda.
This document summarizes a Malaysian Federal Court case involving two appellants, Lawrence Masuni and another, who were convicted of murdering Willy Tuoh. The appellants appealed their conviction and sentence, arguing that the trial judge erred in finding that the key witness, PW14, was not an accomplice and in failing to require corroboration of his testimony. The Federal Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the conviction and sentence. It held that PW14 was not an accomplice because there was no evidence he agreed to help commit the crime. Even if he was an accessory after the fact by not reporting the crime, that alone would not make him an accomplice. The trial judge found PW14 to be a credible witness
The appellant was charged with abetting another person in the murder of her husband. She claimed trial and was found guilty by the High Court. On appeal, the Court of Appeal had to determine if the various charges laid against the appellant by the prosecution were proper. The charges against the appellant had changed multiple times due to objections from the defense and rulings from different judges. The Court of Appeal had to examine this complex procedural history to decide whether the appellant's conviction was valid.
Family Law Notes (Non-muslim) - Promise to MarryStudious Season
1) The document discusses the requirements and defenses for a valid contract to marry under family law, including consideration, capacity, age, and breach of promise.
2) It also covers the consequences of breaching a promise to marry, including general damages for emotional distress and lost prospects, as well as special damages for specific financial losses.
3) Defenses against a breach of promise claim include misrepresentation of facts, lack of a duty for full disclosure, and proof of actual moral, physical, or mental infirmity that renders the promisee unfit for marriage.
International Humanitarian Law - The Usage of Agent Orange in Vietnam WarStudious Season
The document discusses the usage of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War and its impacts. It provides historical background on Agent Orange and how over 80 million litres were sprayed, destroying forests and contaminating soil. Victims suffered health issues and denial of rights. The usage sparked international outcry and the creation of new legal instruments like the ENMOD to prohibit environmental warfare techniques. Scholars argued the usage violated international law and called for stronger legal protections and accountability.
This document summarizes key aspects of defamation law in Malaysia. It discusses who can sue for defamation (corporations and companies but not governmental bodies), who can be sued (the author and publisher of defamatory words), the types of defamation (libel is written, slander is spoken), when slander becomes actionable per se (impugning chastity, professional reputation, contagious disease, crime), the elements required to establish defamation (defamatory words, reference to plaintiff, publication), and defenses to defamation (truth, public benefit, fair comment).
The document appears to be a scanned copy of a legal contract or agreement spanning multiple pages. It includes standard legal language and clauses addressing terms such as compensation, responsibilities, confidentiality, ownership of intellectual property, and dispute resolution. While the specific details are unclear due to the poor quality scan, the general nature of the document seems to be establishing an agreement between two parties for services or work to be provided.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance, private nuisance, and under strict liability for the bonfire that spread and caused damage. For public nuisance, Helmi negligently left the bonfire unattended, obstructing a highway and committing an environmental offence. For private nuisance, the bonfire smoke substantially and unreasonably interfered with the neighbor's enjoyment of their land. For strict liability, the bonfire was a dangerous thing Helmi intentionally stored that escaped and damaged the neighbor's property. Helmi can be sued by the Attorney General, local authorities, private individuals with consent, and the neighbors who suffered special damages.
Helmi lit a bonfire in his garden to burn rubbish. The smoke from the fire annoyed his neighbors and damaged a neighbor's clothes. It also obstructed the vision of a passing motorist who crashed into a lamp post as a result. Later, the fire spread and destroyed a neighbor's garden shed.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance because the smoke obstructed the motorist. He committed a criminal offence by lighting the fire without approval. Helmi is also liable for private nuisance to his neighbors due to the smoke and damage. Finally, Helmi is strictly liable under Rylands v Fletcher because the fire was a dangerous thing that escaped from his property and damaged his neighbor.
There are several types of damages that can be awarded in tort cases:
1. General damages are presumed losses such as pain/suffering, loss of future earnings, or damage to reputation from libel/slander. The amount is not fixed.
2. Special damages refer to quantifiable out-of-pocket expenses like medical bills that must be specifically pleaded.
3. Contemptuous damages may be awarded when the plaintiff does not have a strong claim or deserved what happened.
4. Nominal damages are awarded when a tort is proven but actual losses are not, or damages are shown but not quantified.
5. Exemplary damages aim to punish and deter future actions
This document summarizes a High Court ruling on an application for revision of a criminal case. The accused, a ship captain, was convicted of smuggling diesel and fined RM100,000 or six months imprisonment. He sought revision on two grounds: 1) His conviction was improper as the prosecution did not prove the seized oil was diesel. 2) Confiscation of his ship was illegal as he was just the captain, not the owner. The High Court allowed the revision in part, ordering the ship be released as confiscation required the owner be charged. However, it denied other requests, finding the conviction was valid given the accused pleaded guilty knowing the nature and consequences.
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
This document briefly explains the June compliance calendar 2024 with income tax returns, PF, ESI, and important due dates, forms to be filled out, periods, and who should file them?.
Synopsis On Annual General Meeting/Extra Ordinary General Meeting With Ordinary And Special Businesses And Ordinary And Special Resolutions with Companies (Postal Ballot) Regulations, 2018
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
2. What is the definition of assault?
• S 351 – A threat or apprehension of threat of us of force about to be used against
a person by the accused. The gist of the offence lies on the effect which the
threat creates in the mind of the victim.
According to the illustration, the act of unloosing the muzzle of a ferocious dog,
intending or knowing it to be likely cause a person to believe that he is about to
cause a dog attack is an assault.
• Mere words do not amount to assault. The words must be accompanied by
gestures or preparations that amount to an assault. According to the illustration,
if a person holds up a stick and says, ‘I will give you a beating’, it amounts to
assault due to the gesture. If there is no gesture, there is no assault.
2
3. What is the punishment for assault?
• S 352 – Imprisonment 3 month or fine or both.
3
4. What is the section for assault/criminal force
to protect woman against indecent behaviour?
• S 354 – Assault/criminal force that outrages a woman’s modesty shall
be punished with imprisonment up to 2 years or with a fine or both.
• S 509 – Words, gestures or act intending to insult modesty of any
woman shall be punished with simple imprisonment up to 1 year or
with fine or both.
Elements?
• There is an extra element in which there must be intention to outrage
the woman’s modesty or with the knowledge that it was likely to
outrage her modesty.
4
5. Act of fingering of a baby is considered as an
outrage to her modesty in the case of...
• State of Punjab v Major Singh
Facts: Respondent fingered a baby and held guilty for causing hurt.
Held: Conviction altered to assault/criminal force that is intended to
outrage her modesty. The outrage does not necessarily must be felt
or made by the victim herself but it is according to any other woman
in the presence of it on the common notions of mankind.
5
6. Slapping a woman on her posterior amounted
to ooutraging her modesty in the case of...
• Rupan Deol Bajaj v Kanwar Pal Singh Gill
6
7. CRIMINAL LAW FLASHCARDS
Murder & Culpable Homicide
Made by: Nur Aliah bt Amran
1
Content
1. Definition
2. Illustration
3. Explanation
4. Difference between murder and
culpable homicide
5. Whether the accused desire the results
do not matter in the case of murder
8. What is culpable homicide?
• S 299 – Culpable homicide is an act of intentionally causing death or
with the intentionally cause bodily injury that is likely to cause death,
or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death.
2
9. Explain briefly the illustrations provided for
culpable homicide
• S 299(a) – In this illustration, A has the intention and knowledge that
his acts would be likely to cause death [A lays sticks over a pit].
• S 299(b) – In this illustration, A has knowledge that his action will
cause death [A tells B to shoot at a bush].
• S 299(C) – A has no intention nor knowledge that his act will cause
death [A shoots at bush thinking it was a fowl, but it turns out to be a
person].
3
10. Other areas which fall under culpable
homicide
• Accelerating a disorder, disease or bodily infirmity through bodily
injury – deemed to cause the death [S 299 Explanation 1].
• Victim refuses to take proper remedies and skilful treatment for the
bodily injury – the accused deemed to cause the death [S 299
Explanation 2].
• Causing the death of living child, when any part of the child has been
brought forth, though the child may not have breathed, or been
completely born [S 299 Explanation 3].
4
11. Punishment for culpable homicide
• S 304 – Imprisonment for life or imprisonment that may extend to 10
years and fine or both.
5
12. What is murder?
• S 300 – When an act to cause death is done with intention to cause
death, or done with intention to cause bodily injury to be likely to
cause death, or done with intention to cause bodily injury that is
sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death or the
person committing the act knows it is so imminently dangerous that it
must all in probability cause death.
6
13. • S 300(a) – A has intention and knowledge and the bodily injury is
imminently dangerous to cause death [A shoots Z].
• S 300(b) – A has intention and knowledge and that bodily injury is
sufficient knowing the disease of Z; murder. A does not know the
disease of Z; culpable homicide.
• S 300(c) – A intentionally causes a cut wound that is sufficient to
cause death; murder, even if A did not have intention to cause death.
• S 300(d) – A fires a loaded cannon into a crowd and kills one person’
murder, even if he did not have premeditation to kill any particular
individual.
7
Explain briefly the illustrations provided for
murder
14. Difference between culpable homicide or
murder?
• Reg v Govinda, Melville J - It depends on the degree of risk to human
life. If death is likely result, it is culpable homicide; if it is the most
probable result, it is murder [Accused struck victim with his fists].
8
15. Murder: Does it matter if the accused ‘desire’
the results or not?
• No.
• R v Nedrick, Lord Lane CJ – To convict for murder, it does not matter
whether the accused has little desire for death to happen, as long as
he realises that his act would inevitably result in death or serious
harm [Accused set letter box of woman’s house on fire, fire spread
and killed her child].
• Hyam v Director of Public Prosecutions, Lord Hailsham LC – It does
not matter in such circumstances whether the defendant desires
those consequences to ensue or not.
9
17. Which section of PC that provides this?
• S 300, exception 1: Culpable homicide is not murder when offender,
while
a) deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation,
causes the death of the person who gave the provocation; or
b) causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident.
• The authors of IPC said: Homicide committed in the sudden heat of
passion on great provocation ought to be punished to teach men o
respect human life but that in general it ought not to be punished so
severely as murder.
2
18. What are the provisos it is subjected to?
1. Provocation not sought or voluntarily provoked by offender as an
excuse for killing or doing harm to any person [provocation sought
is not a provocation].
2. Provocation not done legally or by public servant in lawful exercise
of his power [public servant arresting/interrogating is not
provocation].
3. Provocation not done in the lawful exercise of right of private
defense [someone becomes aggressive for private-defense; not
provocation].
3
19. K M Nanavati v State of Maharashtra
• Facts: In the case, the accused had sufficient time for him to regain
his self-control before shooting the man whom his wife has cheated
with [he went to his ship to get the revolver and went to the guy’s
apartment]. This shows his conduct is a deliberate and calculated
one.
• Held: Exception 1 to s 300 PC cannot be invoked where there has
been sufficient time after the provocation for passion to cool down
and for reason to regain dominion over the mind. The test is whether
a reasonable person in the same situation would have reacted to the
provocation as the accused did and would have been so much
provoked as to lose self-control and take the life of another person.
4
20. Holmes v Director of Public Prosecutions
• Facts: In this case, the wife give a statement of adultery before being
struck by her husband dead. There were no evidences to show her
statement was true.
• Held: The House dismissed the appeal to use exception 1 S 300. Mere
confession of adultery is not sufficient provocation to reduce killing
from murder to manslaughter.
5
21. Director of Public Prosecututions v Camplin
• Lord Diplock laid down that to determine whether the act in question
was done under provocation or not is the test of a reasonable man; a
reasonable man is a person having the power of self-control to be
expected of an ordinary man of the sex and age of the accused.
• In the case, the boy struck the deceased with a chapati pan. It was
held that to taunt a person because of his race, physical infirmities or
some shameful incident in the past is offensive. That he was only 15
years of age at the time of the killing is the relevant characteristics of
the accused in the instant case. It is a characteristic which has its
effects on the temperament as well as physique. Appeal dismissed.
6
24. What defines ‘simple hurt’?
• S 319 – Simple hurt is bodily pain, disease or infirmity.
3
25. What are the elements of voluntarily causing
hurt?
• S 321 – When the person has intention to cause hurt or the
knowledge that he is likely to cause hurt.
4
26. What is the punishment for voluntarily causing
hurt?
• S 323 – The punishment is imprisonment up to 1 year or with a fine or
both.
5
28. What are the kinds of hurt that fall under
‘grievous’?
• Emasculation.
• Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.
• Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
• Privation of any member or joint.
• Destruction of permanent impairing of the powers of any member or join.
• Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.
• Fracture or discolation of a bone or tooth.
• Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the
space of 10 days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary
pursuits.
7
29. What are the elements of causing grievous
hurt?
• S 322 – When someone voluntarily causes grievous hurt or that he
knows to be likely to cause grievous hurt.
8
30. What is the punishment for voluntarily causing
grievous hurt?
• S 325 – Imprisonment up to 7 years or fine or both.
9
32. Is physical contact is a requirement for hurt to
be established?
• No.
• Jashanmal Jhamatmal v Brahmanand Sarupanand
Facts: The accused shouted ‘Haoo’ which caused the victim to suffer from
nervous shock and collapsed.
Held: Infirmity denotes an unsound mind or unhealthy state of the body or
mind and clearly a state of temporary mental impairement or hysteria or
terror would constitute infirmity, within the meaning of the expression in s
319 of PC. Therefore, the accused must be deemed to have intended to
cause hurt to the woman, and the question whether that hurt was simple
or grievous would depend on the medical evidence. Accused is convicted.
11
33. If someone dies from being hurt would it be
culpable homicide?
• No.
• Marcelino Fernanded v State
Facts: Accused beat up the victim for selling a fake ring. They slapped, kicked and used a broken tile. The
victim died 3 hours later.
Held: Accused only convicted under hurt because; first, there is no clear evidence that the victim died due to
the beating and not the fall. Secondly, the accused and the victim do not have previous enmity and therefore
has no intention to cause death but only to punish the deceased. It was held that the accused be convicted
only for voluntarily causing hurt.
• Muhammad Rafi v Opposite Party
Facts: Accused stabbed the victim with a pen-knife due to a quarrel. The victim died 15 days later due to
septic poisoning from the wound.
Held: The accused is convicted for voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous instrument. This is because
from medical evidence – the wound from the pen-knife is not itself sufficient to cause death, because the
septic poisoning is also pressed by hands and bandaged with dirty cloth. Therefore, the accused’s act was
not likely to cause death. But since the wound is ‘dangerous to life’, it falls under ‘grievous’.
12
34. • R v Clarence: It does not fall under the definition (maliciously wound
to inflict grievous bodily harm with any weapon or instrument).
13
It is not ‘grievous hurt’ for a man to infect his wife
his disease through sexual intercourse that is
consented due to her ignorance
36. What is the definition for wrongful restraint?
• S 339 – Obstructing a person from moving from one place to another
where he has a right to proceed and wants to go. Exception is where
the person believes in a good faith that he has lawful right to
obstruct.
2
37. What is the punishment for wrongful
restraint?
• S 341 – Imprisonment up to 1 month or with a fine or both.
3
38. What is the definition for wrongful
confinement?
• It is a form of wrongful restraint under which a person is wrongfully
prevented from proceeding beyond certain circumscribed limits. For
example, arrest or locking up of a man in a room or tying him up to a
tree amounts to wrongful confinement.
4
39. Is physical obstruction necessary?
• Physical obstruction is unnecessary.
• It is sufficient, if such an impression was produced on the mind of the
victim as to create a reasonable apprehension that he was not free to
depart and that he would be forthwith restrained, if he attempted to
do so.
5
40. What is the punishment for wrongful
confinement?
• S 342 – Imprisonment up to 1 year or fine or both.
6
41. It is not limited to offences against public
servant but is a general section in the case of...
• Shyam Lal Sharma v State of Madhya Pradesh
7