šŸ“– Book 26 - Chapter 404
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
122  
(..13..)  
Offences Affecting the Human Body  
CULPABLE HOMICIDE  
(Chapter VI Ss. 100, 102, 105 and 110)  
QUESTION BANK  
Q1. When ā€˜culpable homicide’ is not amounting to ā€˜murder’?  
Q2. What is murder when does ā€˜culpable homicide’ not amount to murder?  
Q3. Define and distinguish between ā€˜Culpable Homicide’ and Murder, referring to  
decided cases.  
Q4.  
What is Murder? Distinguish it from culpable homicide.  
Explain and illustrate ā€˜Death caused by rash and negligent act’.  
SHORT NOTES  
Q5.  
1. Culpable Homicide  
SYNOPSIS  
I. Introduction-  
II. Definition and Core Concept:  
III. Punishment for Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder (Section 105):-  
IV]  
Explanations-  
Culpable Homicide by Causing the Death of a Person other than the Person Whose  
Death is Intended (S.102): -  
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
123  
V. Difference between Culpable homicide and murder-  
I. Introduction-  
The term ā€˜Homicide’ is derived from the Latin terms 'homo' (man) and 'caedere' (to  
kill), broadly refers to the killing of a human being by another person. However, not every  
act of homicide is considered a crime; it is bifurcated into lawful and unlawful categories.  
Lawful homicides are excusable or justifiable, often covered by general exceptions, and  
include acts like killing in self-defence, court-ordered executions (death penalty), or actions  
by a police officer in lawful duty. In contrast, unlawful homicides are those not permitted  
by law and are punishable crimes, which primarily include culpable homicide and murder.  
Under the BNS, offences affecting the human body, including culpable homicide  
and murder, are detailed in Chapter VI of the BNS 2023. Culpable homicide is defined  
under Section 100 of BNS 2023 (corresponding to the repealed Section 299 of IPC 1860).  
Sections 101, 105, and 110 deals with the offence of culpable homicide. There are three  
types of unlawful homicides.  
i)  
S.100 defines ā€˜ā€˜Culpable Homicide Simplicitor’;  
S.102 defines ā€˜murder’, whereas,  
ii)  
iii)  
exceptions to S. 102 clauses (1) to (4) provide for the circumstances  
when ā€˜Culpable Homicide’ does not amount to murder’.  
In both ā€˜culpable homicide’ and ā€˜murder,’ causing death is common, and there is  
the necessity of criminal intention or knowledge in both. The BNS, carries on the same  
definition of culpable homicide under s. 299 of I.P.C. There is a renumbering and reframing  
of the same section in both I.P.C and BNS.  
II. Definition and Core Concept:  
Culpable homicide is defined in Section 100 of the BNS. Culpable homicide is the  
first kind of unlawful homicide. S. 100 provides that-Whoever causes death by doing an  
act -  
i)  
With the intention of causing death; or  
ii)  
With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause  
death.  
iii)  
With the knowledge that he is likely by such an act to cause death,  
Commits culpable homicide (S. 100).  
This is a foundational concept from the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that has been  
carried over into the BNS. The key elements are the mental state of the offender (intent or  
knowledge) and the resulting death of a person.  
Illustrations  
a)  
A
lays sticks and turf over a pit with the intention of thereby  
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
124  
causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused.  
Z, believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. A has  
committed the offence of culpable homicide.  
b)  
A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it. A, intending  
to cause or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induces B to fire at the  
bush. B fires and kills Z. Here, B may be guilty of no offence, but A has  
committed the offence of culpable homicide.  
c)  
A, by shooting at a fowl with intent to kill and steal it, kills B, who  
is behind a bush; A does not know that B is there. Here, although A was doing  
an unlawful act, he was not guilty of culpable homicide, as he did not intend  
to kill B or cause death by doing an act that he knew was likely to cause death.  
Illustrations a) and b) to S. 100 give examples of ā€˜Culpable Homicide’ accompanied  
by the first or third species. Illustrations c) show that unless one or other of the three species  
is present, there can be no culpable homicide.  
ā€œIntention of causing deathā€ in clause (i) of S. 100 above is also prima facie  
murder within the express words of S. 101. Rest of the clauses, i.e. (ii) and (iii) of S. 100,  
do not provide for strong intention to cause death but the likeliness of causing it. This  
element of mens rea makes the difference between ā€˜murder’ and ā€˜ā€˜Culpable Homicide’’.  
III. Punishment for Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder (Section 105):  
Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, addresses the punishment  
for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The law makes a clear distinction based  
on the offender's mental state. If the death is caused with the (i) intention of causing death  
or (ii) a bodily injury likely to cause death, the punishment is imprisonment for life, or  
imprisonment for a term not less than five years but which may extend to ten years, and a  
fine. However, if the act is committed with the (iii) knowledge that it's likely to cause death,  
but without the intention to do so, the punishment can be imprisonment for a term of up to  
ten years and a fine. In short, if the offence falls under the first two categories of the  
definition, the punishment is severe than for offences falling under the third category.  
III. Illustrations to the definition-  
Illustrations to Section 100 illustrate the concept of culpable homicide further.  
Illustration  
a)  
A
lays sticks and turf over a pit with the intention of thereby  
causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused.  
Z, believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. A has  
committed the offence of culpable homicide.  
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
125  
b) A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it. A, intending  
to cause or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induces B to fire at the  
bush. B fires and kills Z. Here, B may be guilty of no offence, but A has  
committed the offence of culpable homicide.  
c)  
A, by shooting at a fowl with intent to kill and steal it, kills B, who  
is behind a bush; A does not know that B is there. Here, although A was doing  
an unlawful act, he was not guilty of culpable homicide, as he did not intend  
to kill B or cause death by doing an act that he knew was likely to cause death.  
Illustrations a) and b) to S. 100 give examples of ā€˜Culpable Homicide’ accompanied  
by the first or third species. Illustrations c) show that unless one or other of the three species  
is present, there can be no culpable homicide.  
ā€œIntention of causing deathā€ in clause (i) of S. 100 above is also prima facie  
murder within the express words of S. 101. Rest of the clauses, i.e. (ii) and (iii) of S. 100,  
do not provide for strong intention to cause death but the likeliness of causing it. This  
element of mens rea makes the difference between ā€˜murder’ and ā€˜ā€˜Culpable Homicide’’.  
IV]  
Explanations-  
There are the following three explanations for this Section. These explanations are  
added to the section to explain the concept of culpable homicide more correctly-  
1) A person who causes bodily injury to another, who is labouring under a disorder,  
disease, or bodily infirmity and thereby accelerates the death of another, is deemed to have  
caused his death.  
Thus, if A, while suffering from an incurable disease, is violently assaulted by B,  
even after knowing of A’s incurable disease, and A dies in a few days, B has killed A.  
Therefore, B is guilty of culpable homicide.  
2)  
Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes such bodily injury  
is deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting to proper remedies and skilful  
treatment, the death might have been prevented.  
Thus, if A deliberately inflicts an injury on B, likely to result in death, B refuses to  
allow a surgeon to perform an operation on the wound. B dies of the infection in that  
wound. A has killed B and, therefore, is guilty under this section.  
But the connection between the injury and the death must not be too remote.  
3)  
The causing of the death of a child in the mother’s womb is not homicide. But it may  
amount to culpable homicide to cause the death of the living child if any part of that child  
has been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born.  
As defined by S. 10, ā€˜man’ denotes a male human being of any age, and ā€˜woman’  
denotes a female human being of any age. Therefore, causing the death of a child just born  
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
126  
is similarly serious as causing the death of a fully grown human being. As soon as any part  
of a child has been brought forth from the mother’s womb, the child is considered a living  
human being.  
In Emperor V/s Falani1  
Facts: - the accused struck his wife a blow on the head with a plough sphere, which, though  
not shown to be a blow likely to cause death, made her unconscious. He believed her to be  
dead. The accused hanged her on a beam by a rope to make a false defence of suicide by  
hanging, thereby causing her death by strangulation.  
Held: - that the accused was not guilty of culpable homicide but convicted him of grievous  
hurt.  
In Vasant’s case2  
Facts: - The accused administered a single knife blow right on the chest of the deceased  
with such great force that the ribs were cut, and both the heart and lung were punctured.  
Held: The accused was held liable for culpable homicide, not amounting to murder since  
he had inflicted a single knife blow.  
Culpable Homicide’ by Causing Death of a Person other than Person Whose  
Death is Intended (S.102):-  
S.100 embodies a well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence based on the  
doctrine of transferred malice. It provides that ā€˜if a person by doing anything which he  
intends or knows to be likely to cause death, commits the culpable homicide by causing  
the death of any other person, whose death he neither intends nor knows himself to be  
likely to cause’, is punishable similarly as the culpable homicide of intended person.  
Thus, if A intends to kill B but kills C, whose death he neither intends nor knows  
himself to be likely to cause, the intention to kill C is, by law, attributed to him and be  
held guilty of culpable homicide.  
However, the rule laid down under S. 102 cannot well be stated as an explanation  
to either S. 100 or S.101, but it relates to both, i.e., for murder and culpable homicide.  
In Gyanendra Kumar’s Case3  
Facts: - The accused was deliberately trying to shoot at a fleeing man who had criticised  
his father in a school committee meeting, but unfortunately, his own maternal uncle came  
in between him and the intended victim and thus got killed.  
Held: - That the act of the accused was nothing but murder under S. 302, read with  
S. 301 of IPC.  
1 1919.  
2 1983 Cr.L.J. 693 (SC)  
3 1972 Cr.L.J. 308 (SC)  
     
ā€œLaw Master’s Publicationā€  
ā€œCulpable Homicideā€  
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale  
127  
An attempt to commit culpable homicide is also punished under S. 110 of BNS. The  
punishment under this section varies based on the outcome of the act: (i) If no harm is  
caused: The person can be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of up to three years, a  
fine, or both. (ii) If hurt is caused: The punishment is more severe, with imprisonment for  
a term of up to seven years, a fine, or both.  
V. Difference between Culpable homicide and murder-  
It's important to remember the distinction between culpable homicide and murder,  
which also remains consistent across both codes.  
a. Culpable Homicide is the broader category. All murders are culpable homicides, but not  
all culpable homicides are murders.  
b. Murder is a species of culpable homicide that has a higher degree of mens rea (guilty  
mind), specifically falling under the more stringent conditions listed in IPC Section 300  
(now BNS Section 101). These conditions include a definite intent to cause death or an act  
so imminently dangerous that it is highly probable to cause death. The BNS and IPC both  
have provisions for a crime to be considered culpable homicide not amounting to murder,  
such as when an act is committed under grave and sudden provocation or in the exercise of  
private defence.  
*****  
Purchased by: Guest