Culpable Homicide v. Murder

What does it mean to murder a person? It is easy to say that it is the killing of another human being, however, it has complex legal implications. Not every killing will be murder under the criminal law. Certain instances will fall under culpable homicide which, in a broader sense, covers all forms of unlawful killing whether it was the result of intent or negligence.

It is imperative for every CLAT aspirant, for each budding law student, and for each future judiciary hopeful to understand the difference between culpable homicide and murder. The distinction is not only at the core of Indian criminal law but it also distinguishes intent and knowledge and varies punishment based on those aspects.

1. Homicide Defined

Homicide is derived from the Latin homi (man) and cido (to kill), in essence, homicide is one human killing another.

Homicide can be:

1. Lawful - e.g. done in self-defence or performed as part of a lawful execution or similar.
2. Unlawful - e.g. murder, culpable homicide, unlawful killing by negligence.

All murder is homicide, however, not all homicide is murder.

Read More: Right to Equality: Art 14-18 Explained

2. Meaning of Culpable Homicide

Culpable homicide is defined in Section 299 of the IPC as follows - a person commits culpable homicide if they cause death by:

1. Intention of causing death or
2. Intention of causing such bodily injury that is intended to result in death or
3. Knowledge that is likely to result in death.

Culpable homicide thus signifies a mental element (intention or knowledge) and a physical element (causing death).

Even if death was not directly intended, each person acted with the knowledge that the act could cause death, which would still be culpable homicide.

Example:

A strikes B with a heavy stick, knowing it could cause B serious injury. B dies.

A has committed culpable homicide.

Must Read: CLAT vs AILET: Both Entrance Tests Compared

3. Definition of Murder

According to Section 300 IPC, culpable homicide also becomes murder when the act is done:

1. With the intention of causing death; or,
2. With the intention of causing such bodily injury that the person committing the act knows is likely to cause death; or,
3. With the intention of causing bodily injury which is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death; or,
4. With the knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must cause death and is done without any excuse.

Murder is therefore the aggravated form of culpable homicide, which are acts committed with a greater intention, degree of knowledge, and cruelty.

Read More: Defamation and Freedom of Speech: Understanding the Differences

4. Key Differences Between Culpable Homicide and Murder

5. Exceptions: Cases of Culpable Homicide That Are Not Considered Murder

Indian law establishes five primary exceptions in the Section 300 IPC:

1. Grave and Sudden Provocation: Based on the Supreme Court's decision in K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, a person loses control as a result of intense provocation where culpability arises from the provocation.
2. Exceeding the Right of Private Defence: Based on the judgment in Nathan v. State of Madras, where a person caused death while exercising the right of self-defense and exceeded what was legally allowed to do so.
3. Public Servant: Death occurs while acting in the course of a person's employment, provided they believed they were acting in good faith.
4. Sudden Fight and Without Premeditation: Reaction to a spontaneous fight that resulted in death: Reg v. Govinda.
5. Consent of the Victim: Few cases, where the victim dies with the victim's consent. In these exceptions, there is the absence of intention to kill or where the intent to kill does not rise to the level of murder.

Must Read: WRITS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

6. Important Cases That Illustrate the Difference Between Culpable Homicide and Murder

1. Reg v. Govinda (1876): Husband slapped wife during an argument. The wife fell and died. It was held that culpable homicide, not murder.
2. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962): Husband shot the love interest of his wife in a sudden fit of rage. Held that culpable homicide due to provocation.
3. Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (1958): Essentially established that intention and injury are sufficient to cause death equals to murder.
4. Rishi Prakash Tyagi Case: It is a custodial death that was reduced from murder to culpable homicide since the intent was not established.

Conclusion

The line that separates culpable homicide from murder is the line between law and human emotion. The law understands that not every killing deserves equal punishment, sometimes they are the result of rage, panic or sudden emotion.

Having an understanding of this distinction not only hones your legal reasoning for CLAT and Judiciary exams, but also this distinction furthers your understanding of justice, that intentions equal to action matters.

Read More: WHAT IS CLAT ? SYLLABUS AND PATTERN

Join our Flames CLAT Family at https://t.me/flamesclat

For Informative videos, do check out  https://youtube.com/@flamesclat?si=-PqiaRLEjutM-iYj