Skip to main content

Criminal Law

 


Introduction: Criminal law deals with the criminal, and helps to protect the societies and security of individual interests and ensure the survival of different groups in society. 

There are two types of criminal law: 

  1. Substantive law: In this law the substance defines law and punishment like IPC. The right and obligation that govern people and organization it include all law of general and specific applicability. 

  2. Procedural law: It include the procedure, and establish the legal rules by which substantive law is created, applied and enforced particularly in court. Example: CRPC CPC. Criminal Law 


The criminal law deals with the different kind crime took place in our society now question arises that what is the Crime? 

 Judge Blackstone defines crime as an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law either forbidding or commanding it. 

 Oxford Dictionary defines crime as an act punishable by law as forbidden by statute or injurious to the public welfare, not only against individual, but crime against the society. 

Offence and Crime 

Crime is an act or omission punishable by law. But the offence is a particular crime as per law all offence can be consider as a crime but crime didn’t consider as offence because the offence is a part of crime, crime is a broader term and offence is a part of crime.

Civil wrong and Criminal wrong 

Civil wrong is committed is committed against the individual, and criminal wrong are committed against the state or property. Civil; wrong are to enforce the right, while the criminal wrong are to punish the wrong doing, civil wrong are to determine the right and liability of the parties, while the criminal wrong are to determine whether the accused is guilty or not. In civil wrong damages, injunction specific and performed, in criminal wrong there is fine imprisonment or death penalties are remedies. 

There are two main component of the Crime. 

First is Mens Rea and second is Actus Reus.

Actus Reus: Actus Reus is a Latin phrase for guilty act. To prove crime against a person the essential ingredient to be prove is actus reus which mean to prove a crime there are some act is been done. It is a wrongful deed that comprises the physical components of a crime that must be coupled with mens rea for one to be held criminally liable. 

  1. Human action which is usually termed as conduct.

  2. The result of such act in the specified circumstances which is designated as injury.

  3. Such act as it prohibited by law. 

Mens Rea: it is a Latin phrase for guilty mind basically the state of mind. In a case the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the mental element or guilty mind while committing a crime to secure a conviction. When the act does it with a guilty mind, causing injury to an assailant in self dependence is not a crime but the movement injury is caused with the intent to take revenge the act become criminal likewise shooting in air is no crime but shooting with the intent to kill a man is crime.  



 

      

   
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