INDIAN PENAL CODE

CULPABLE HOMICIDE & MURDER

Delhi Law Academy – India‟s Finest Law Coaching

Judicial Services, LLM Entrance
www.delhilawacademy.com
All materials, copyrights and trademarks are rights of their respective owners
INDIAN PENAL CODE : CULPABLE HOMICIDE & MURDER

CULPABLE HOMICIDE DEFINED

Section 299
 Whoever causes death
o 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

Explanatory Notes from DLA on section 299

What is culpable homicide?
 Section 299 defines culpable homicide as the act of causing death with one of
these:
o with the intention of causing death,
o with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death,
o with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.
 It is not necessary that any intention should exist with regard to the
particular person whose death is caused, as in the familiar example of a shot
aimed at one person killing another, or poison intended for one being taken by
another.
 The intention demanded by the section must stand in some relation to a
person who either is alive, or who is believed by the accused to be alive.
 The knowledge must have reference to the particular circumstances in
which the accused is placed.

Question 1:
 Is a man guilty of culpable homicide if he shoots at the stump of a
tree?

2 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Ans:
 If a man kills another by shooting at what he believes to be a third person
whom he intends to kill, but which is in fact the stump of a tree, it is clear that
he would be guilty of culpable homicide.

 This is because though he had no criminal intention towards any human being
actually in existence, he had such an intention towards what he believed to be
a living human being.
Authority: Palani Goundan v. Emperor [1919 Mad]

Question 2:
 Is a man guilty of culpable homicide if he shoots at a living human
being believing him to be dead?
Ans.:
 The intention of the accused must be judged not in the light of the actual
circumstances, but in the light of what he supposed to be the circumstances.
 It follows that a man is not guilty of culpable homicide if his intention was
directed only to what he believed to be a lifeless body.
Authority: Palani Goundan v. Emperor [1919 Mad]
*************

ILLUSTRATIONS TO SECTION 299

Illustration (a)
 A lays sticks and turf over a pit
o with the intention of thereby causing death
o or with the knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused
 Z believing the ground to be firm
o treads on it, falls in and is killed
 A has committed the offence of culpable homicide

The first illustration shows that it is not necessary that the intention to cause
death should be towards any particular person. It could be quite general in

3 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

nature. Here, the intention is to cause death of whoever comes that way and walks
on the trap.

Illustration (b)
 A knows Z to be behind a bush
o B does not know it
 A intending to cause or knowing it likely to cause Z‟s death
o induces B to fire at the bush
 B fires and kills Z
 Here B may be guilty of no offence
o but A has committed the offence of culpable homicide

The second illustration holds an abettor guilty of committing culpable homicide. In

the absence of this illustration, A would be guilty of abetment only, but by force of
this illustration, he is to be held guilty of committing culpable homicide.
*************

MURDER DEFINED
Section 300
 Except in cases hereinafter excepted:
 culpable homicide is murder
First
 if the act by which death is caused
o is done with the intention of causing death
Secondly
 if the act by which death is caused
o is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury
o as the offender knows likely to cause death of the person to whom
the harm is caused
Thirdly
 if the act by which death is caused
o is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person

4 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

 o and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted
 is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death
Fourthly
 if the person committing the act knows
o that it is so imminently dangerous
o that it must, in all probability, cause death
 or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death
 and commits such act without any excuse
o for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid

Explanatory Notes from DLA on section 300

Analysis of clause "secondly":
 The distinguishing feature of the mens rea requisite under clause "secondly" is
the knowledge possessed by the offender regarding the particular victim being
in such a peculiar condition or state of health that the internal harm caused to
him is likely to be fatal, notwithstanding the fact that such harm would not in
the ordinary way of nature be sufficient to cause death of a person in normal
health or condition.

 The „intention to cause death‟ is not an essential requirement of this clause.

Only the intention of causing the bodily injury coupled with the offender‟s
knowledge of the likelihood of such injury causing the death of the particular
victim is sufficient.

 It requires both; some intention and some knowledge.

 Instances of cases falling under clause (2) of Section 300: Where the
assailant causes death by a fist blow intentionally given, knowing that the
victim is suffering from an enlarged liver or enlarged spleen or diseased heart
and such blow is likely to cause death of that particular person as a result of
rupture of the liver or spleen or failure of the heart.

Authority: State of A.P. v. Rayavarapu Punnayya [1977 SC]

5 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Analysis of clause "thirdly":
The prosecution must prove the following facts before it can bring a case under
Section 300 “thirdly”;
 First, it must establish, quite objectively, that a bodily injury is present.
 Secondly, the nature of the injury must be proved; these are purely objective
investigations.
 Thirdly, it must be proved that there was an intention to inflict that
particular bodily injury, that is to say, that it was not accidental or
unintentional, or that some other kind of injury was intended.
 Fourthly, it must be proved that the injury of the type just described made up
of the three elements set out above is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary
course of nature. This part of the enquiry is purely objective and inferential
and has nothing to do with the intention of the offender.

Main requirements for application of clause "thirdly":

 Subjective: The accused had the intention to cause the bodily injury actually
found to be present
 Objective: The injury actually caused is sufficient in the ordinary course of
nature to cause death.
Once these are established:
 It does not matter that there was no intention to cause death.
 It does not matter that there was no intention even to cause an injury of a kind
that is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature .
 It does not even matter that there was no knowledge that an act of that kind
will be likely to cause death.
Source: Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab [1958 SC]

Analysis of clause "fourthly":

 Clause (4) of Section 300 would be applicable where knowledge of the
offender as to the probability of death of a person or persons in general - as
distinguished from a particular person or persons - being caused from his
imminently dangerous act, approximates to a practical certainty.

6 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

  Such knowledge on the part of the offender must be of the highest degree of
probability, the act having been committed by the offender without any
excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.
Source: State of A.P. v. Rayavarapu Punnayya [1977 SC]

Correspondence between the three clauses of section 299 with the four
clauses of section 300
 Clause (a) of Section 299 corresponds with clause (1) of Section 300. Both
require intention to cause death.
 Clause (b) of Section 299 corresponds with clauses (2) and (3) of Section 300.
Both require intention to cause bodily injury. The difference between
clause (b) of Section 299 and clause (3) of Section 300 is one of the degree of
probability of death resulting from the intended bodily injury. The word
“likely” in clause (b) of Section 299 conveys the sense of „probable‟ as
distinguished from a mere possibility. The words “bodily injury … sufficient in
the ordinary course of nature to cause death” mean that death will be the
“most probable” result of the injury, having regard to the ordinary course of
nature.
 Clause (c) of Section 299 corresponds with clause (4) of Section 300. Both
require knowledge of the probability of the act causing death.
Source: State of A.P. v. Rayavarapu Punnayya [1977 SC]
************

ILLUSTRATIONS TO SECTION 300

There are four illustrations to section 300, each dealing with one limb of the section.

Illustration (a)
 A shoots Z with the intention of killing him
o Z dies in consequence
o A commits murder

This illustration illustrates the first limb where there is intention to cause death.

7 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Illustration (b)
 A knowing that Z is labouring under such a disease
o that a blow is likely to cause his death
o strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury
o Z dies in consequence of the blow
 A is guilty of murder
o although blow might not have been sufficient in ordinary course of
nature
o to cause death of a person in a sound state of health

This illustration illustrates the "secondly" of section 300.

Illustration (c)
 A intentionally gives Z a sword-cut or club-wound
o sufficient to cause death of a man in the ordinary course of nature
o Z dies in consequence
 Here, A is guilty of murder
o although he may not have intended to cause Z‟s death

This illustration illustrates the "thirdly" of section 300.

Illustration (d)
 A without any excuse fires a loaded cannon
o into a crowd of persons and kills one of them
 A is guilty of murder
o although he had no premeditated design to kill any particular
individual

This illustration illustrates the "fourthly" of section 300.

***********

8 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

EXCEPTIONS TO MURDER
There are five exceptions to section 300, each of which takes away a case from the
offence of "murder" and makes it a case of "culpable homicide not amounting to
murder".

Exception 1 When culpable homicide is not murder

 Culpable homicide is not murder
o if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave
and sudden provocation
o causes death of the person who gave the provocation or
o causes death of any other person by mistake or accident

Explanatory Notes from DLA on Exception 1

Question 1:
 What are the essential ingredients of Exception 1?
Ans:
(1) The deceased must have given provocation to the accused.
(2) The provocation must be grave.
(3) The provocation must be sudden.
(4) The offender, by reason of the said provocation, shall have been deprived of
his power of self-control.
(5) He should have killed the deceased during the continuance of the
deprivation of the power of self-control.
(6) The offender must have caused the death of the person who gave the
provocation or that of any other person by mistake or accident.

Question 2:
 What is the test of grave and sudden provocation?
Ans:
 The test of “grave and sudden” provocation is whether a reasonable man,
belonging to the same class of society as the accused, placed in the situation

9 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

 in which the accused was placed would be so provoked as to lose his self-
control.
 Thus, it is the test of a reasonable man.
 The test is whether a reasonable person placed in the same position as the
accused was, would have reacted to the provocation in the same manner in
which the accused did.

Question 3:
 Is there any uniform standard of reasonableness?
Ans:
 No, what a reasonable man will do in certain circumstances depends upon
the customs, manners, way of life, traditional values etc.; in short, the
cultural, social and emotional background of the society to which an accused
belongs.

Question 4:
 Whether words and gestures alone, unaccompanied by acts, may
also cause grave and sudden provocation?
Ans:
 Yes, in India, words and gestures may also, under certain circumstances,
cause grave and sudden provocation to an accused so as to bring his act within
the first Exception to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code.

Question 5:
 Can the mental background created by the previous act of the
victim be taken into consideration?
Ans:
 Yes, the mental background created by the previous act of the victim may be
taken into consideration in ascertaining whether the subsequent act caused
grave and sudden provocation for committing the offence

10 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Question 6:
 What is the effect of time lag between the act of provocation and
the commission of offence?
Ans:
 The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the influence of passion arising from
that provocation and not after passion had cooled down by lapse of time or
otherwise giving room and scope for premeditation and calculation.
************

EXCEPTION 2
 Culpable homicide is not murder
 if the offender
o in exercise in good faith of right of private defence of person or
property
o exceeds the power given to him by law and
o causes death of person against whom he is exercising right of defence
 without premeditation and
 without any intention of doing more harm than is necessary for
such defence

EXCEPTION 3
 Culpable homicide is not murder
o if the offender, being a public servant
o exceeds the powers given to him by law and
o causes death by doing an act
 which he, in good faith, believes to be lawful and necessary
 for due discharge of his duty as such public servant and
o without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused

EXCEPTION 4
 Culpable homicide is not murder
 if it is committed

11 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

 o without premeditation
o in a sudden fight in the heat of passion
o upon a sudden quarrel
o without the offender having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel
or unusual manner
Explanation
 It is immaterial in such cases
o which party offers provocation or commits the first assault

Explanatory Notes from DLA on Exception 4

Question 1:
 What are the essential ingredients of Exception 4?
Ans:
 A 'sudden fight' implies mutual provocation and blows on each side. In
whatever way the dispute might have started, the subsequent conduct of both
parties puts them, in respect of guilt, upon equal footing
 There is no previous deliberation or determination to fight. A fight
suddenly takes place, for which both parties are more or less to be blamed. It
may be that one of them starts it, but if the other had not aggravated it by his
own conduct it would not have taken the serious turn it did. There is then
mutual provocation and aggravation, and it is difficult to apportion the share
of blame which attaches to each fighter.
 Heat of passion requires that there must be no time for the passions to cool
down.
 For application of Exception 4, it must further be shown that the offender has
not taken undue advantage or acted in cruel or unusual manner. The
expression 'undue advantage' as used in the provision means 'unfair
advantage'.

Question 2:
 Compare the provisions of Exception 4 with the provisions of
Exception 1?

12 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Ans:
 Exception 4 is founded upon the same principle as Exception 1, for in both
there is absence of premeditation. But, while in case of Exception 1, there is
total deprivation of self-control, in case of Exception 4, there is only that heat
of passion which clouds men's sober reason and urges them to deeds which
they would not otherwise do.
 There is provocation in Exception 4 as in Exception 1; but the injury done is
not the direct consequence of that provocation.
**************

EXCEPTION 5
 Culpable homicide is not murder
 when the person whose death is caused
o being above the age of eighteen years
o suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent
*************

TRANSFER OF MALICE
Death of person other than intended
Section 301
 If a person by doing anything which he intends or knows likely to cause death
o commits culpable homicide by causing death of any person
o whose death he neither intends nor knows himself likely to cause
 the culpable homicide committed by the offender
o is of the description of which it would have been
o if he had caused death of the person
 whose death he intended or knew himself likely to cause

*************

13 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER
Section 302
 Whoever commits murder
o shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life and fine

Explanatory Notes from DLA on section 302

Question:
 In what cases can death penalty be imposed?
Ans:
 The normal rule is that the offence of murder shall be punished with the
sentence of life imprisonment. The court can depart from that rule and impose
the sentence of death only if there are special reasons for doing so. Such
reasons must be recorded in writing before imposing the death sentence

 While considering the question of sentence to be imposed for the offence of

murder under Section 302; the court must have regard to every relevant
circumstance relating to the crime as well as the criminal. If the court finds,
but not otherwise, that the offence is of an exceptionally depraved and heinous
character and constitutes, on account of its design and the manner of its
execution, a source of grave danger to the society at large, the court may
impose the death sentence.

 For persons convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death
sentence an exception. A real and abiding concern for the dignity of human
life postulates resistance to taking a life through law's instrumentality. That
ought not to be done save in the rarest of rare cases when the alternative
option is unquestionably foreclosed.

Authority: Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab [1980 SC]

**************

14 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

Punishment for murder by life-convict
Section 303
 Whoever being under sentence of imprisonment for life
o commits murder
o shall be punished with death

DLA NOTE:
 This section has been struck off by the Supreme Court in 1982, holding it
unconstitutional in the case of Mithu v. State of Punjab.
**************

Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder

Section 304
 Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder
 shall be punished
o with imprisonment for life or imprisonment of upto ten years and fine
 if the act by which death is caused is done
 with the intention of causing death or
 with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to
cause death or
o with imprisonment of upto ten years or fine or both
 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

Explanatory Notes from DLA on section 304

Three types of punishment for culpable homicide:
For the purpose of fixing punishment, the Code practically recognises three degrees
of culpable homicide.

15 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

  The first is what may be called, „culpable homicide of the first degree‟. This is
the greatest form of culpable homicide, which is defined in Section 300 as
„murder‟.

 The second may be termed as „culpable homicide of the second degree‟. This is
punishable under the first part of Section 304.

 Then, there is „culpable homicide of the third degree‟. This is the lowest type of
culpable homicide and the punishment provided for it is, also the lowest
among the punishments provided for the three grades. Culpable homicide of
this degree is punishable under the second part of Section 304.

 It is the degree of probability of death which determines whether a

culpable homicide is of the gravest, medium or the lowest degree.

 The word “likely” in clause (b) of Section 299 conveys the sense of
„probable‟ as distinguished from a mere possibility. The words “bodily injury
… sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death” mean that death
will be the “most probable” result of the injury, having regard to the
ordinary course of nature.

Question:
 When does culpable homicide become murder?
Ans:
 In the scheme of the Penal Code, „culpable homicide‟ is the genus and „murder‟
is its species.

 All „murder‟ is „culpable homicide‟ but not vice-versa.

 Speaking generally, „culpable homicide‟ sans „special characteristics of

murder‟, is „culpable homicide not amounting to murder‟.

16 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

"Judgment writing" and "approach of a Court" on culpable homicide and
murder:
Whenever a court is confronted with the question whether the offence is „murder‟ or
„culpable homicide not amounting to murder‟, it will be convenient for it to approach
the problem in three stages.
Stage 1:
 The question to be considered at the first stage would be, whether the accused
has done an act by doing which he has caused the death of another.

Stage 2:
 Proof of such causal connection between the act of the accused and the death
leads to the second stage for considering whether that act of the accused
amounts to “culpable homicide” as defined in Section 299.

Stage 3:
 If the answer to this question is prima facie found in the affirmative, the stage
for considering the operation of Section 300, Penal Code is reached. This is
the stage at which the court should determine whether the facts proved by the
prosecution bring the case within the ambit of any of the four clauses of the
definition of „murder‟ contained in Section 300.
 If the answer to this question is in the negative, the offence would be „culpable
homicide not amounting to murder‟, punishable under the first or the second
part of Section 304, depending, respectively, on whether the second or the
third clause of Section 299 is applicable.
 If answer to this question is found in the positive, but the case comes within
any of the exceptions enumerated in Section 300, the offence would still be
„culpable homicide not amounting to murder‟, punishable under Section 304,
Penal Code. Else, it is murder, punishable under section 302.

*************

17 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com

CASE LAW ON CULPABLE HOMICIDE & MURDER

1. Palani Goundan v. Emperor [1919 Mad]

2. Kapur Singh v. State of PEPSU [1956 SC]
3. In Re Thavamani [1943 Mad]
4. Rawalpenta Venkalu v. State of Hyderabad [1956 SC]
5. Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab [1958 SC]
6. State of A.P. v. Rayavarapu Punnayya [1977 SC]
7. Emperor v. Mt. Dhirajia [1940 All.]
8. Gyarsibai v. The State [1953 M.B.]
9. K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra [1962 SC]
10. Ghapoo Yadav v. State of M.P. [2003 SC]
11. Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi) [2011 SC]
12. Jai Prakash v. State (Delhi Admn) [1991 SC]
13. Dhupa Chamar v. State Of Bihar [2002 SC]
14. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab [1980 SC]

All judgments have been condensed by DLA, retaining the original

language of Judges and the ratio decidendi.

*************

18 Coaching for Judicial Services, DU LLB and CLAT | www.delhilawacademy.com