Crimes Against BODY PDF

Preview

Summary

chapter of IPC- offences against human body...

Description

MODULE 1

CHAPTER 16 OF IPC OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY OF OFFENCES AFEECTING LIFE

S.299- CULPABLE HOMICIDE S.300- MURDER S.301- CULPABLE HOMICIDE BY CAUSING DEATH OF PERSON OTHER THAN PERSON WHOSE DEATH WAS INTENDED S.302-PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER S.303-PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER BY LIFE CONVICT S.304-PUNISHMENT FOR CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER S.304A-CAUSING DEATH BY NEGLIGENCE S.304B-DOWRY DEATH S.305-ABETMENT OF SUICIDE OF CHILD OR INSANE PERSON S.306-ABETMENT OF SUICIDE S.307-ATTEMPT TO MURDER S.308-ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CULPABLE HOMICIDE S.309-ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE S.310-THUG S.311-PUNISHMNET

S.299 IPC – CULPABLE HOMICIDE (MANSLAUGHTER) CULPABLE

HOMICIDE

PUNISHABLE

KILLING OF ONE HUMAN BEING BY ANOTHER

LAWFUL

UNLAWFUL

GIVEN AS AN EXCEPTION UNDER IPC

MURDER, CULAPBLE HOMICIDE NOT

(JUSTIFIABLE, EXCUSABLE)

AMOUNTING TO MURDER, CAUSING DEATH BY NEGLIGENCE, SUICIDE

INGREDIENTS OF 299   

CAUSES DEATH OF A HUMAN BEING BY DOING AN ACT OR ILLEGAL OMISSION THE ACT MUST BE DONE a) With the intention of causing death b) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death c) With the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death

Probability of death is low compared to murder. Intention of causing death may not be in particular Ex 1: accelerating death of a person who is suffering under a disorder, disease, or bodily infirmity by causing bodily injury – deemed to have caused his death Ex 2: Although by resorting to proper remedies and skilful treatment the death might have been prevented ,whoever caused death by causing a bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused death Ex 3: Causing of death in mother’s womb is not homicide. But it may amount to culpable homicide causing the death of a living child if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born S.304 IPC – PUNISHMENT FOR CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER If it is caused with the intention of causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death  

Imprisonment for life Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years



And shall also be liable to fine

If the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death but not with abovementioned intentions  Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years  Or with fine  Or with both

S.300 IPC-MURDER Every murder is culpable homicide but every culpable homicide is not murder. INGREDIENTS OF 300   

Causes death of a human being By doing an act or illegal omission The act must be done with the a) Intention of causing death b) Intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows is likely to cause death c) Intention to cause bodily injury and such bodily injury inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death d) Knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death

Exception 1:When culpable homicide is not murder- whilst deprived of the power of self control- causes the death of a person who gave sudden and grave provocation-or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident Exceptions to exception 1  That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender  Anything done in obedience to law/public servant in lawful exercise of his power  Provocation is not by lawful exercise of right private defence Exception 2: In good faith-exercise the right of private defence of person or property-causes death without premeditation-without any intention of doing more harm than necessary for the purpose of such defence Exception 3: public servant or a person aiding public servant-and for advancement of public justice-causes death of a person- in good faith-believes to be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty as public servant-without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused Exception 4: Without premeditation-in a sudden fight-in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel-offender have not taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner (Immaterial which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault)

Exception 5: Above 18-suffers death-take risk of death-with his own consent

All four clauses of murder requires the act which causes death should be done intentionally or with the knowledge or means of knowing that death is the natural consequence of the act. All acts of killing done with the intention to kill or to inflict bodily injury sufficient to cause death or with the knowledge that death must be the most probable result are prima facie murder. It is culpable homicide where death must have been known to be a probable result. It is murder where death must have been known to be the most probable result.

The Indian Penal Code recognizes three types of culpable homicide Culpable homicide of first degree-Section 300 Culpable homicide of second degree-punishable under first part of section 304 Culpable homicide of third degree-punishable under second part of section 304

S.302 IPC-PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER  Death  Imprisonment for life  And shall also be liable to fine

SECTION 303 OF IPC Punishment for murder by life-convict.—whoever, being under sentence of imprisonment for life, commits murder, shall be punished with death. The Supreme Court in Mithu vs. State of Punjab struck down Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which provided for a mandatory death sentence for offenders who committed murder whilst serving a life sentence. Violative of Article 14 and Article 21- There is no rational justification for making a distinction in the matter of punishment between persons who commit murders whilst they are under the sentence of life imprisonment and persons who commit murders whilst they are not under the sentence of life imprisonment. Further, no rational distinction can be made in the matter of sentencing between a person who commits murder after serving out the sentence of life imprisonment and a person who commits murder while he is still under that sentence. A person who stands unreformed after a long term of incarceration is not, by any logic, entitled to preferential treatment as compared with a person who is still under the sentence of life imprisonment. The classification based upon such a distinction proceeds upon irrelevant

considerations and bears no nexus with the object of the statute, namely, the imposition of a mandatory sentence of death. There are as many as 51 sections in the Penal Code which provide for the sentence of life imprisonment. A person who is sentenced to life imprisonment for any of these offences incurs the mandatory penalty of death under s. 303, if he commits a murder while he is under the sentence of life imprisonment. There might have been the semblance of some logic to explain, if not to sustain, such a provision if murder was the only offence for which life imprisonment was prescribed as a punishment. It could then be argued that the intention of the legislature was to provide for enhanced sentence for the second offence of murder. But, under the section as it stands, a person who is sentenced to life imprisonment for breach of trust or for sedition under s. 124-A or for counterfeiting a coin under s. 232 or for forgery under s.467 will have to be sentenced to death if he commits a murder while he is under the sentence of life imprisonment. There is nothing in common between such offences previously committed and the subsequent offence of murder. Indeed, it defies all logic to understand why such a provision was made and what social purpose can be served by sentencing a forgerer to a compulsory punishment of death for the mere reason that he was undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment for forgery when he committed the offence of murder. The motivation of the two offences is different, the circumstances in which they are committed would be different and indeed the two offences are basically of a different genre. To prescribe a mandatory sentence of death for the second of such offences for the reason that the offender was under the sentence of life imprisonment for the first of such offences is arbitrary beyond the bounds of all reason. It is because the death sentence has been made mandatory by s. 303 I.P.C. in regard to a particular class of persons that, as a necessary consequence, they are deprived of the opportunity under s.235 (2), Cr. P.C. to show cause why they should not be sentenced to death and the Court is relieved from its obligation under s. 354 (3), CrPc to state the special reasons for imposing the sentence of death. S.304A IPC-CAUSING DEATH BY NEGLIGENCE INGREDIENTS  causes death  by doing rash or negligent act  imprisonment of either term which may extend to two years  or with fine  or with both Negligence should be the direct and proximate cause of another’s death Section 279 in the Indian Penal Code

Rash driving or riding on a public way.—Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

S.304B IPC-DOWRY DEATH

INGREDIENTS death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband  for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry,  Such death shall be called “dowry death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.    

Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 In this act, `dowry’ means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly: o by one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or o by the parents of either party to a marriage or by any other person, to either party to the marriage or to any other person; at or before or any time after the marriage in connection with the marriage of said parties but does not include dower or Maher in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.

S.307 IPC- ATTEMPT TO MURDER    

does any act with such intention or knowledge if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine





And if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by life convicts.—when any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.

S.308 IPC-ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CULPABLE HOMICIDE     

does any act with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both

OF HURT

S.319 IPC- HURT  causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity S.320 IPC- GRIEVOUS HURT (First) — Emasculation. (Secondly) —Permanent privation of the sight of either eye. (Thirdly) — Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear, (Fourthly) —Privation of any member or joint. (Fifthly) — Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint. (Sixthly) — Permanent disfiguration of the head or face. (Seventhly) —Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth. (Eighthly) —Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

S.321 IPC- VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT  Causes Hurt  with the intention of thereby causing hurt to any person,  or with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause hurt to any person, S.322 IPC -VOLUNTARILY CAUSING GRIEVOUS HURT. Whoever voluntarily causes hurt, If the hurt which he intends to cause or knows himself to be likely to cause is grievous hurt,  And if the hurt which he causes is grievous hurt, is said “voluntarily to cause grievous hurt.” A person is not said voluntarily to cause grievous hurt except when he both causes grievous hurt and intends or knows himself to be likely to cause grievous hurt. But he is said voluntarily to cause grievous hurt, if intending or knowing he to be likely to cause grievous hurt of one kind, he actually causes grievous hurt of another kind. E.g.: A, intending or knowing himself to be likely permanently to disfigure Z’s face, gives Z a blow which does not permanently disfigure Z’s face, but which cause Z to suffer severe bodily pain for the space of twenty days. A has voluntarily caused grievous hurt.  

S.323 IPC- PUNISHMENT FOR VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT  Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year,  or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees,  Or with both. S.325 IPC-PUNISHMENT FOR VOLUNTARILY CAUSING GRIEVOUS HURT

 

Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven year And shall also be liable for fine

S.339 IPC-WRONGFUL RESTRAINT  

Voluntarily obstructs any person So as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed. EXCEPTION The obstruction of a private way over land or water which a person in good faith believes he to have a lawful right to obstruct is not an offence within the meaning of this section.

S.340 IPC-WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT 

Wrongfully restrains any person



in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits

S.341 IPC-PUNISHMENT FOR WRONGFUL RESTRAINT  

simple imprisonment which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to 500 rupees



or with both

S.342 IPC-PUNSHMENT FOR WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT  imprisonment of either description which may extend to one year  or with fine which may extend to 1000 rupees  or with both S.359 IPC- KIDNAPPING Kidnapping is of two kinds:

i. ii.

kidnapping from India and Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.

S.360 IPC- KIDNAPPING FROM INDIA  conveys any person  beyond the limits of India  without the consent of that person,  or of some person legally authorized to consent on behalf of that person S.361 IPC- KIDNAPPING FROM LAWFUL GUARDIANSHIP  takes or entices  any minor under sixteen years of age if a male, or under eighteen years of age if a female, or any person of unsound mind,  out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such minor or person of unsound mind,  Without the consent of such guardian. (The words “lawful guardian” in this section includes any person lawfully entrusted with the care or custody of such minor or other person). (Act of 14/42 of 1949 EXCEPTION Does not extend to the act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be a. the father of an illegitimate child, b. Or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled to lawful custody of such child, unless such act is committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose. S.362 IPC- ABDUCTION   

by force compels, or by any deceitful means induces, any person to go from any place,

S.363 IPC-PUNISHMENT FOR KIDNAPPING  

imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, And shall also be liable to fine. Difference between Kidnapping and Abduction 1. Kidnapping only in respect of minor while abduction is in respect of a person of any age 2. A person kidnapped is removed from lawful guardianship. A child without guardian cannot be kidnapped. Abduction has reference exclusively to the person abducted. 3. In kidnapping simply taking away or innocent means maybe used. In Abduction force ,compulsion or deceitful means are used 4. Consent of the person taken or enticed is immaterial in kidnapping while in abduction consent freely and voluntarily given condone it

5. Intention of offender is irrelevant in kidnapping while it is an important factor in Abduction 6. Kidnapping is a substantive offence under the code but abduction is an auxiliary act not punishable by itself file:///D:/3rd%20semester/Crimes2/S_Varadarajan_vs_State_of_Madras_09091964__SCs640081COM59364.pdf

file:///D:/3rd%20semester/Crimes-2/030_The%20Concept%20of%20taking%20in%20relation %20to%20the%20offence%20of%20Kidnapping%20(399-404).pdf...