Skip to main content

CRIME

 


                                            CRIME


INTRODUCTION

Crime is any action or offence that defies a state or country and in punishable by law. A crime is an act done by a person which is against the laws of a country or region. A Person who does this is called a criminal.Crime is an anti-social and illegal behaviour to which penalties are attached. This anti-social behaviour is rejected by the by the society and punished by law. Those actions which are sinful but no punishments are attached to them they are not criminal acts like anti-social activities. Through no anti-social activity is punished by law the society and public condemns it. But in certain criminal tribes stealing is not looked upon as a crime. Children are praised if they steal property from others. They are taught the art of crime and how to become careful while committing the crime. 

DEFINITIONS OF CRIME

1) Hall Jerome (1947) has defined crime as legally forbidden and intentional action, which has a harmful impact on social interests, which has a criminal intent and which has legally prescribed punishment for it.This definition suggests that no action should be considered as crime unless it has the following characteristics:

(a) Crime is legally forbidden

(b) It is not intentional

(c) It is harmful to the victim and the society

(d) It has criminal intent and

(e) Some penalty is prescribed for it.

2) According to Barnes and Teeters, “The term crime technically means a form of anti-social behaviour that has violated public sentiment, to such an extent as to be forbidden by statute.”

 

INGREDIRENTS OF CRIME

The most important thing common in all these laws is that they contain certain basic elements. The following are four basic elements of crime:

1. Accused person 

2. Mens rea

3. Actus Reus

4. Injury

1. Accused person

No crime can ever occur out of thin air because that would simply be an accident. In order to constitute a crime, it is important for somebody to commit it. The law should always be able to pinpoint the person who is responsible for committing an offence. The term accused person does not suggest that only a human being can commit offences. According to Section 11 of IPC, the term person also includes a company and an association or body of persons. Therefore, even a trust, an NGO and a public company can commit offences. Furthermore, certain offences can implicate more than one person for the same crime. In such cases, all persons will face trial and may have to face punishment together.

2. Mens rea

A mere person will never commit a crime unless he possesses some intention to commit it. The law generally refers to this intention as mens rea, which means guilty mind in Latin. The term mens rea has been derived from a famous Latin maxim: Actus non factit reum nesi mens sit rea. This basically means that an act cannot be guilty if it does not accompany a guilty mind. The element of mens rea itself comprises of certain inherent elements. These include intention, motive or knowledge. Which of these elements must exist in order to constitute an offence generally depends on the relevant provision. For example, Section 300 of IPC contains various kinds of acts which amount to the offence of murder. These acts may include an act done with the “intention” of causing bodily injury sufficient to cause death. Furthermore, it also includes an act of which the offender has knowledge of it being imminently dangerous. Therefore. We need to look at the relevant provisions to understand what kind of intention is necessary.

Crimes in the absence of mens rea

Although mens rea is an essential element of crime, some offences can occur without it. For example, Section 304-A of IPC makes death by negligence a criminal offence. In such cases, a negligent act would not include the intention to cause death. However, negligence or mistake itself is sufficient to constitute a crime.

3. Actus Reus

Merely possessing a guilty mind and thinking of committing a crime is not enough. The accused person must also act on that intention and do something in its furtherance. Actus reus basically refers to an act or omission which leads to the completion of an offence. Both mens rea, as well as actus reus, together are important to create an offence.Actus reus can be a positive act, such as stabbing a person to cause his death. It can also be an omission (failure) to perform an action. For example, driving a vehicle without a driving license is an omission.

4. Injury

The last of the basic elements of crime is an injury. There can be no crime if no person faces some kind of an injury. According to Section 44 of IPC, injury means any harm caused to a person illegally either in mind, body, reputation or property. However, there can be some crimes which might not require injuries to anybody. For example, driving without a driving license is a crime even if it may not harm anybody.

CONCLUSION

A crime should be an act or omission of an act. In other words, a person cannot be punished for his criminal thoughts. Only when his thought is expressed in criminal action, it will be considered as a crime. The act must be voluntary and the person (criminal) has control over his actions. In other words, any act committed when the person is insane and has no control over his action cannot be a crime. The act should be intentional with a motive and intention may be general or specific, i.e. any crime committed without a specific intention, all of a sudden, out of rage or any sudden situational factor is not a crime.

 

By, 

Asha Sebastian.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more