INTRODUCTION –

Students often get confused between culpable homicide and Murder. These two concepts are relatably different. There is a thin line that separates the two of them. This frequently causes problems for advocates and legal professionals when deciding how to present the case because of the slight variance. Culpable homicide and murder concepts are important for law postgraduate and judiciary exams.

We have outlined the differences in this article and provided a clear explanation. Therefore, this article would be your pinnacle if you were aiming for either of these two examinations. So, let’s get started!

Generally, the thin line of distinction between them is the reason why many find it interesting. Even poses difficulty for advocates and legal practitioners who are unsure where to lay the case. Murder and culpable homicide appear to be more similar than they are, but they are not interchangeable terms. Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code defines culpable homicide, whereas Section 300 deals with the concept of murder. The person who begins to learn these notions is always snarled up by these phrases. The term ‘homicide’ refers to the killing of a human being, the term ‘culpable homicide’ refers to the unlawful killing of a person and the term ‘murder’ also refers to the killing of a person. So what are the slight points to be pondered to arrive at a conclusion? This article deals with every such aspect of the topic. 

 “ALL MURDERS ARE CULPABLE HOMICIDE, BUT ALL CULPABLE HOMICIDES ARE NOT MURDER”

MURDER

The term murder can be traced back to the German word “morth” which means secret killing. It refers to intentional killing of one person by another person with any forethought. It is considered to be a more serious offence as compared to culpable homicide. Section 300 of the Code state what acts under culpable homicide amount to murder. Moreover, an offence of murder will not be considered as murder unless it includes an offence that falls under culpable homicide. Hence it can be said that a culpable homicide is a genus whereas a murder is a species. Just like in the case of culpable homicide, intention and knowledge is very important.

CULPABLE HOMICIDE

While dealing with culpable homicide, Section 299 of the Code comes into play. It states that whoever causes death to a person by doing act with any intention of causing death or with the knowledge of doing such act to cause death to a person is said to commit an offence of the same. The main qualifiers of it is causing death by doing an act with the intention or with the intention of causing bodily injury as is likely to cause death or with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death.

An act will not amount to this offence without any of these elements even if it is of criminal nature.Section 299 deals primarily with the intention and also about the knowledge which may probably cause death. In the case of Sunder Lal VS. The State of Rajasthan, the weapons used were a lathi and a gandasi. There was only one blow which was directed on head and several others injuries on hands and legs with the gandasi and lathi.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MURDER AND CULPABLE HOMICIDE

The main reason why Sections 299 and 300 are known to be overlapping offences is due to the difficulty in differentiating and understanding the difference between them as a real yet thin line of difference exists. The most confusing aspect between the two is that of “intention” of the offender as it is to cause death under both the provisions. Thus, the degree of intention of the offenders is to be considered.

If a victim was killed by a well-planned method then it can be regarded as a murder because the intention to kill was in high degree whereas if a victim is killed without any pre-planned method then such a death can be regarded as a culpable homicide as it would take place in a sudden fight. The major difference is that murder is more aggravated form of culpable homicide. There doesn’t exist any ambiguity in murder that the act may or may not kill as in the case of culpable homicide. Hence, it could be safe to say that whether the act committed is a culpable homicide or a murder totally is a question of facts.

There are certain ways to differentiate between these two concepts and it is latent with the term “seriousness of intention”. The word “likely” is used in Section 299 which states one of the probabilities which amount to culpable homicide but the word “sufficient” is used in Section 300 which denotes most probably.

Subsequently, another difference can be that of the chance of death wherein it is high in case of murder and less under culpable homicide. Another difference is of mensrea where it is involved with a difference of degree in both the offences. This difference was cleared by Justice Melvin in the case of Reg. VS. Govinda.[17] In this case the accused knocked his wife down, then put one knee on her chest and then struck two or three blows with a closed fist. This produced extraversion of blood on the brain and she died consequently but there was no intention to cause death and also the injuries were no sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course. The accused was thus held liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Moreover, the courts have developed a system which would decide under which section will the case fall. The very first stage out of the three stages is whether the accused has committed the act which caused the life of the victim. If the answer is positive, then the net stage is to consider whether the act is under Section 299 of the Code. The last stage of the process is reached if the answer is found to be affirmative. This is the stage where the Court decides if the facts of the case bring it under any of the four clauses of murder in Section 300 of the IPC. However, it is difficult to categorically distinguish between the two.

CONCULSION

The interpretation and wordings of offences relating to human body are clear and appropriate. Both culpable homicide as well as murder are overlapping yet distinct crimes. They differ with respect to the degree of probability of death or the seriousness of the act even though they seem to be same in a way. It can be said that culpable homicide is a wider term than murder. If the act that is done by the offender is a heinous crime resulting in death then it fall under the criteria of murder whereas if the act leaves the victim alive with grievous hurt then it is culpable homicide which doesn’t result in murder. Thus, in order to decide an act, the facts have to be ascertained in the first place and then knowledge and intention of the offender has to be ascertained. If the intention or knowledge is higher, then it would automatically fall under the ambit of murder.

Case laws related to murder and culpable homicide:

1. State of Maharashtra v. ChandraprakashKewalchand Jain (1990): The Supreme Court of India differentiated between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The court clarified that for murder, there must be an intention to cause death, while culpable homicide can occur without such an intention.

2. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1961): This landmark case dealt with the concept of culpable homicide and distinguished it from murder. The Supreme Court held that when a person kills another in the heat of passion and without premeditation, it falls under culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

3. R. v. Dudley and Stephens (1884): This famous English case involved four survivors of a shipwreck who were adrift at sea. In order to survive, three of them killed and consumed the fourth person. The court held that their act constituted murder, even under the dire circumstances, as there was no legal justification for intentionally causing someone's death.

4. Emperor v. Dharampal (1945): In this case, the Lahore High Court held that the distinction between murder and culpable homicide lies in the presence of intention to cause death. If the accused had the intention to cause death, it would be murder; otherwise, it would be culpable homicide.

5. State of Punjab v. Dalbir Singh (2012): The Supreme Court of India clarified that in cases of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, the prosecution must prove that the accused caused the death intentionally, but without the intention to cause grievous hurt that could lead to death.