Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(35) But before adverting to the above proposition it would be appropriate to throw light on the interpretation of relevant provisions of Sections 299 and 300 of IPC, in the light of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(36) In the case of Arun Nivalaji More vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2006) 12 SCC 613, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been observed as under :-

"11. First it has to be seen whether the offence falls within the ambit of Section 299 IPC. If the offence falls under Section 299 IPC, a further enquiry has to be made whether it falls in any of the clauses, namely, clauses 'Firstly' to 'Fourthly' of Section 300 IPC. If the offence falls in any one of these clauses, it will be murder as defined in Section 300 IPC, which will be punishable under Section 302 IPC. The offence may fall in any one of the four clauses of Section 300 IPC yet if it is covered by any one of the five exceptions mentioned therein, the culpable homicide committed by the offender would not be murder and the offender would not be liable for conviction under Section 302 IPC. A plain reading of Section 299 IPC will show that it contains three clauses, in two clauses it is the intention of the offender which is relevant and is the dominant factor and in the third clause the knowledge of the offender which is relevant and is the dominant factor. Analyzing Section 299 as aforesaid, it becomes clear that a person commits culpable homicide if the act by which the death is caused is done (i) with the intention of causing death; or (ii) with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or (iii) with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death." If the offence is such which is covered by any one of the clauses enumerated above, but does not fall within the ambit of clauses Firstly to Fourthly of Section 300 IPC, it will not be murder and the offender would not be liable to be convicted under Section 302 IPC. In such a case if the offence is such which is covered by clauses (i) or (ii) mentioned above, the offender would be liable to be convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC as it uses the expression "if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death" where intention is the dominant factor. However, if the offence is such which is covered by clause (iii) mentioned above, the offender would be liable to be convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC because of the use of the expression "if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death"

(37) In the above context lets now see to Section 299 of Indian Penal Code which runs as under:-

"299. Culpable homicide -- Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.'' (38) Thus section 299 of IPC lays down culpable homicide as the first kind of unlawful homicide. It is the causing of death by doing :

(40) Indian Penal Code recognizes two kinds of homicide : (1) Culpable homicide, dealt with between Sections 299 and 304 of IPC (2) Not-culpable homicide, dealt with by Section 304-A of IPC. Likewise, there are two kinds of culpable homicide; (i) culpable homicide amounting to murder (Section 300 read with Section 302 of IPC), and (ii) culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 of IPC).

(41) A bare perusal of the said Section makes it clear like a day light that the first and the second clauses of the section 299 IPC refers to intention apart from the knowledge and the third clause refers to knowledge alone and not the intention. Both the expression "intent" and "knowledge" postulate the existence of a positive mental attitude which is of different degrees. The mental element in culpable homicide i.e., mental attitude towards the consequences of conduct is one of intention and knowledge. If that is caused in any of the aforesaid three circumstances, the offence of culpable homicide is said to have been committed. (42) Apart from that there are three species of mens rea in culpable homicide (1) An intention to cause death; (2) An intention to cause a dangerous injury; (3) Knowledge that death is likely to happen. The fact that the death of a human being is caused is not enough unless one of the mental state mentioned in ingredient of the Section 299 IPC is present. An act is said to cause death results either from the act directly or results from some consequences necessarily or naturally flowing from such act and reasonably contemplated as its result. Nature of offence does not only depend upon the location of injury caused on the person of the deceased by the accused, the intention is to be gathered from all facts and circumstances of the case, like if injury is on the vital part, i.e., chest or head etc. and as per the medical evidence that injury had proved fatal. It is relevant to mention here that intention is question of fact which is to be gathered from the act of the party.