Find the answer to the mains question of IPC only on Legal Bites.

Question: A, knowing that B is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. B dies in consequence of the blow. Decide whether A is liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder or culpable homicide amounting to murder. [UPJS 2023]Find the answer to the mains question of IPC only on Legal Bites. [A, knowing that B is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him...

Question: A, knowing that B is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. B dies in consequence of the blow. Decide whether A is liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder or culpable homicide amounting to murder. [UPJS 2023]

Find the answer to the mains question of IPC only on Legal Bites. [A, knowing that B is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. B dies in consequence of the blow. Decide whether A is liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder or culpable homicide amounting to murder.]

Answer

In the scenario described, the liability of A would depend on the specific provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the facts of the case. Let's analyze the situation:

Knowledge of Likely Consequence: A knows that B is suffering from a disease, and A is aware that striking B with a blow is likely to cause his death.

Intention of A: A strikes B with the intention of causing bodily injury, not necessarily intending to cause B's death.

As per Section 300 of the IPC which defines Murder,

“except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or—
2ndly.—If it is done with the 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, or—
3rdly.—If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or—
4thly.—If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous 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 for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.”

In the present case at hand, A, knowing that Z is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. Z dies as a consequence of the blow. A is guilty of murder, although the blow might not have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of a person in a sound state of health. But if A, not knowing that Z is labouring under any disease, gives him such a blow as would not in the ordinary course of nature kill a person in a sound state of health, here A, although he may intend to cause bodily injury, is not guilty of murder, if he did not intend to cause death, or such bodily injury as in the ordinary course of nature would cause death.

Updated On
Mayank Shekhar

Mayank Shekhar

Mayank is an alumnus of the prestigious Faculty of Law, Delhi University. Under his leadership, Legal Bites has been researching and developing resources through blogging, educational resources, competitions, and seminars.

Next Story