For anyone who happens to skim through the provisions of Indian Penal Code/Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the difference between culpable homicide and murder is a headache. It is more like differentiating between identical twins. In this particular blog, we are discussing culpable homicide under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023. Not just a general discussion but an in-depth, word-to-word expansion of ingredients of culpable homicide in BNS. First, let us have a look at its meaning before jumping upon the specific provisions of the IPC and BNS, to have clarity with its examples.
Culpable Homicide Meaning
To understand what culpable homicide means, let us skim through the literal meaning. “Culpable” means “deserving to be blamed” and “Homicide” means “killing of one person by another”. The literal meaning of Culpable homicide is the killing of one person by another, which is not justified but against the law. To understand the concept of “unlawful”, one has to look at the applicable laws.
Culpable Homicide under IPC
The Indian Penal Code is no longer in force, but has been substituted by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. However, most of the legal practitioners still have IPC provisions on tips. Thus, mention of culpable homicide under IPC cannot be skipped. Section 299 of the Code defined culpable homicide. The substitute provision for culpable homicide in BNS is just the same as in IPC. Only the numbering has changed, since Section 299 IPC is now Section 100 of BNS. To know what corresponded under Section 299 of IPC, let us have a look at the provision under Section 100 of BNS.
Culpable Homicide under BNS 2023
As mentioned earlier, Section 100 defines culpable homicide under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Given below is the provision in its bare language, and the meaning under the comments.
“100. Culpable Homicide – Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.”
Comment: Section 100 lays the foundation while defining what constitutes culpable homicide. According to this Section, it is culpable homicide if a person kills someone, or inflicts injury which may cause death, with the intention or knowledge that the act may cause death. The main ingredients of culpable homicide are causing death of a person, intention or knowledge, and deadly act to kill or inflict serious bodily injury knowing that it will cause death. The definition here makes it clear that death of a person is necessary to attract the offence of culpable homicide under BNS 2023. For such culpable homicide to become murder, the specifics of Section 101 must be fulfilled.
“Explanation 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 that other, shall be deemed to have caused his death.”
Comment: The explanation here seeks to emphasize clarity upon what constitutes the offence of culpable homicide under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. It lays about injury caused by one person upon another, who was already suffering from some disorder, disease or bodily infirmity. In such a case, if it accelerates the death of such injured person, the death so caused would be taken to cause culpable homicide under Section 100 of BNS. In other words, direct injury causing death is not the only way of attracting punishment for culpable homicide. Even if the injury aggravates the existing infirmity, it will be taken as intentional culpable homicide.
“Explanation 2.—Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes such bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting to proper remedies and skilful treatment the death might have been prevented.”
Comment: At first stance, the explanation here sounds like even if death is prevented, punishment for culpable homicide will be given. But that is not what is conveyed here. The provision here states that even if the injury so caused could be skillfully treated to avoid death, but if such injury resulted in death, it is culpable homicide. The accused person cannot take advantage that the injury inflicted could have been treated in a timely manner to avoid death. The burden cannot be shifted upon those who could have saved him/her, but remains with the person who inflicted such injury to result in his/her death.
“Explanation 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 a living child, if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born.”
Comment: This explanation focuses upon culpable homicide in case of a pregnant woman mother. The provision seeks to differentiate between causing death of the child of a pregnant woman if the baby remains in the womb, as against that if any part of the baby is brought forth. In case the child is in the mother’s womb and someone causes injury to the mother leading to the death of the child, this is not culpable homicide. On the other hand, if at the time when the injury is caused, some part of the baby is brought forth, that is delivered, it is culpable homicide. It does not matter whether the baby was alive, born still, or completely born.
Video explaining BNS Culpable Homicide of Unborn Child
Culpable Homicide Examples
Given below is a compilation of culpable homicide under BNS 2023 as illustrated in the Bare Act itself to bring clarity of the offence:
- Ansh 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. Ayush, believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. Ansh has committed the offence of culpable homicide.
- Ajay knows Zakir to be behind a bush, while Bunty does not know it. Ajay, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Zakir’s death, induces Bunty to fire at the bush. Bunty fires and kills Zakir. Here Bunty may be guilty of no offence; but Ajay has committed the offence of culpable homicide.
- Ashutosh, by shooting at a fowl with intent to kill and steal it, kills Bhumi, who is behind a bush; Ashutosh had absolutely no knowledge that Bhumi was there. Here, although Ashutosh was doing an unlawful act, he was not guilty of culpable homicide, as he did not intend to kill Bhumi, or to cause death by doing an act that he knew was likely to cause death.
- Yash gives grave and sudden provocation to Atul.On this provocation, Atul fires a pistol at Yash, neither intending nor knowing himself to be likely to kill Jagat, who is near him, but out of sight. Atul kills Jagat. Here, Atul has not committed murder, but merely culpable homicide.
- Shweta strikes Barkha. In turn, Barkha is by this provocation excited to violent rage. Amir, a bystander, intending to take advantage of Barkha’s rage, and to cause her to kill Shweta, puts a knife into Barkha’s hand for that purpose. Barkha kills Shweta with the knife. Here Barkha may have committed only culpable homicide, while Amir is guilty of murder.
- Kabir attempts to horsewhip Astha, not in such a manner as to cause grievous hurt to Astha. Astha draws out a pistol. Kabir persists in the assault. Astha, believing in good faith that she can by no other means prevent herself from being horsewhipped, shoots Kabir dead. Astha has not committed murder, but only culpable homicide.
- Prashant, on grave and sudden provocation, fires a pistol at Z, under such circumstances that if he thereby caused death, he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
