One of the most complex matters under the Indian Penal Code or Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita is to distinguish between Culpable Homicide and Murder. The difference between the two was explained by Melvill J. in R. v Govinda (1876) ILR 1 Bom 342, the accused, about 18 years old, kicked his 15 years wife and when she fell down then put one knee on her chest and struck her a few more blows by fist on her face which caused discharge of blood in the brain resulting in her death. The lower Court convicted him of murder but when the matter was referred to Justice Melvill, he held the accused guilty under clause 2 of Section 299 IPC/100 BNS for culpable homicide and sentenced him under Section 304 IPC/105 BNS part 1 on the ground that the circumstances of the case did neither show intention to cause death nor the bodily injury intended to be inflicted was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death so the death was caused with the intention on the part of the accused to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause death.
| S.No. | Section 299/100 | Section 300/101 |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | All culpable homicide is not murder. | All murder is culpable homicide. |
| 2. | Culpable homicide is a genus. | Murder is a specie. |
| 3. | In case of culpable homicide actus reus is death but mens rea is as defined in 3 parts of section 299/100. | In case of murder actus reus is death and mens rea is as defined in 4 clauses of section 300/101. |
| 4. | Part 1 of Section 299/100 provides that "intentionally causing death is culpable homicide". This part is different from Clause 1 of Section 300/101 because here it is difficult for the Court to ascertain the intention of the accused without other evidence. For example, if a person dies due to one or two violent blows, the Court will not generally infer an intention to cause death on the part of the accused without additional evidence such as previous unsuccessful attempts on the life of the deceased by the same accused. | Clause 1 Section 300/101 says that "culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death". This clause is different from Part 1 of section 299/100 because here the Court can conclude the intention of the accused to cause death. For instance the accused gives a sharp-edged weapon blow on the deceased who falls down and is not in a position to do anything against the accused but the accused continuous to inflict more blows on him ultimately causing is death. Here evidence quite clearly suggests intention to cause death on the part of the accused. |
| 5. | Part 2nd of Section 299/100 states about "intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death". Here the element of 'knowledge' of the accused is absent in comparison to clause 2 of Section 300/101. | Clause 2 of Section 300/101 states that "the act is done with intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused". In this clause the word 'intention' is accompanied with the word 'knowledge' which indicates definiteness or certainty of death and not a mere probability. |
| 6. | Part 2 of Section 299/100 provides about "intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death". The difference between Part 2 of Section 299/100 and Clause 3 of Section 300/101 lies in the degree of probability of death. Part 2 of Section 299/100 will apply where probability of death is comparatively less. | Clause 3 of Section 300/101 says that "intended bodily injury must be sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death". So if the probability of death is more then this clause will be applicable. |
| 7. | Part 3 of Section 299/100 states that "act is done with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death". Here if the 'death' is a likely result of the act done then it is culpable homicide because the degree of risk to human life is less than as provided under clause 4 of Section 300/101. For instance: Causing death driving through a less crowded area. | Clause 4 of Section 300/101 states that "act done must in all probability cause death". Here if the 'death' is most probable result of the act done then it is murder. For instance: Causing death driving furiously through a very crowded area. |
Streamlined elucidation. Appreciate the efforts.
Looking forward to more of such explanations and material.
Thanks for your valuable feedback. Keep motivating us like this.