Skip to main content

Lawful Homicide

 Lawful Homicide

By: Robin Pandey                                                               Date:20/February/2022

  The concept of lawful homicide or justified homicide is a defence from culpable homicide. A homicide is lawful when there is sufficient evidence to disprove beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged doing falls under Mens Rea. The key to this defence is that it was reasonable for the subject to believe that there was an imminent and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grievous hurt to body which is only avoided by the means of force which can lead to the death of the person using such force or the aggressor in legal sense. The distinction between lawful and unlawful homicide depends on whether the offender's act was intentional, careless or otherwise. In the first case, law will set the culprit free while in the second case he will be held criminally responsible for his criminal act. The Code lists certain situations in which criminal responsibility for homicide is either excused or justified. These situations are listed in Chapter iv of the Code i.e. in Sections 76 to 106 dealing with General Exceptions. These include those homicides which are committed with no criminal intention or knowledge.

Excusable Homicide: A homicide is considered in law to be excused in the following cases : 

(i) Section 80: Accident or Misfortune: Where the death is caused by accident or misfortune, and with no criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner, and with proper care and caution. 

(ii) Sections 82 to 85: Where the death is caused by a child (immature mind). or a person of unsound mind, or an intoxicated person. 

(iii) Where death is caused unintentionally by an act done in good faith, for the benefit of the person killed, when:

(iii A)Sections 87, 88 & 89: The person killed, if a minor or lunatic, his guardian has expressly or impliedly consented to such an act: or

(iii B)Section 92: It is impossible for the person killed or his guardian to (b) signifies consent in time or the thing to be done for the benefit of the person concerned.

Justified Homicide: A homicide is considered in law to be justified, if death is caused:

 (i) Section 76: Mistake of fact: by a person who is bound, or by a mistake of fact, in good faith believes himself to be bound by law; or

 (ii) Section 79: Mistake of fact: by a person who acts in pursuant to a lawful authority or, by reason of a mistake of fact, in good faith be believes himself so authorised; or

 (ii) Section 77: Judicial act: by a judge when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which he possesses, or in good faith he believes that he possesses under the law; or

(iv) Section 78: Order of the Court: by a person acting in pursuance of the judgment or order of a Court of Justice: or 

(v) Section 81: Necessity: by a person acting with no criminal intention to cause harm and in good faith to avert other harm to person or property: or

 (vi) Sections 100 & 103: Right to Private defence: In certain specified situations, right of private defence of the body/property extends to the voluntary causing of death of the assailant/culprit.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct