of 5

Criminal Law RD-Vipasha

Published on October 2018 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 5 | Comments: 0




Dr. Dr. Ram Manohar Manohar Lohiya Lohiya National Law University, University, Lucknow 2012-13

Rough Draft – riminal Law- !

Critical Analysis of Basdev v State of Pepsu "U#M!$$%D $&'

Mr. K A Pandey Asstt. Professor (Law)

"U#M!$$%D #('

Vipasha Vipasha Ghangoria III e!ester ".A. LL.". (#ons.) Ro$$ %o. &'




"asde  tate of Pepsu !$)$!&N

AIR &*'+ , -!N$R&DU$!&N

his /ase is 0asi/a$$y a0out 1Into2i/ation as a defense in /ri!ina$ $aw3. e/tion -+ dea$s with that /$ass of /ases where a !an gets into2i/ated o$untari$y. It i!putes the sa!e 4now$edge to su/h a !an as he wou$d hae had5 had he not 0een into2i/ated. 6ne who sins when drun4 0e punished when he is so0er5 qui peccat ebius luat sobrius. he fa/ts of  the /ase are that the appe$$ant was ery drun4 and o$untari$y into2i/ated when he as4ed a 0oy to !oe fro! his p$a/e and when the 0oy de/$ined5 he shot the 0oy with a pisto$. his /ase5 first of a$$ /a!e 0efore the essions ,ourt. he appe$$ant was awarded the $esser pena$ty of transportation for $ife. he appe$$ant appea$ed to the P7P8 #igh ,ourt in Patia$a whi/h proed unsu//essfu$. pe/ia$ $eae was granted 0y the upre!e ,ourt $i!ited to the 9uestion whether the offen/e /o!!itted 0y the petitioner fe$$ under se/tion :;< of the Indian Pena$ ,ode or se/tion :; of the Indian Pena$ ,ode haing regard to the proisions of se/tion -+ of the Indian Pena$ ,ode. R%"%)R* +U%"$!&N"

he 9uestions that sha$$ 0e answered during the /ourse of the pro=e/t are> •

?hether there is a distin/tion 0etween intention5 4now$edge and !otie under the Indian Pena$ ,[email protected]

In !any /ases there is a thin $ine of distin/tion 0etween intention5 4now$edge and !otie. he 9uestion to 0e /onsidered is what separates the three under IP,. •

?hether in present /ase offen/e of !urder under inf$uen/e of drin4 /an 0e redu/ed to /u$pa0$e ho!i/ide not a!ounting to !urder under se/ond part of s. :; of IP,@

he a//used was into2i/ated. he 9uestion to 0e /onsidered is whether it o0s/ured his thin4ing and whether he /ou$d not hae thought a0out the /onse9uen/es of his a/t. •

?hether into2i/ation rendered the appe$$ant in/apa0$e of for!ing any [email protected]

he degree of into2i/ation sha$$ 0e deter!ined fro! the fa/ts of the /ase and it sha$$  0e ana$yed whether the appe$$ant was in/apa0$e of for!ing any intention. •

?hether there is any differen/e 0etween defense of insanity /aused 0y e2/essie drun4enness and the defense of drun4enness whi/h !a4es a person in/apa0$e of  for!ing any [email protected]

he differen/es 0etween 0oth the defenses sha$$ 0e e$a0orated during the /ourse of the  pro=e/t. R%!% & $*% L!$%R)$UR% ases re/erre to in this ase' •

Re2 . Mea4in

Regina . ,ruse and Mary his wife

Reg. . Mon4Bhouse

Reg. . Doherty

Re2 . Meade

Dire/tor of Pu0$i/ Prose/utions . "eard

as the tren /ollowe in the resent case

he trend was fo$$owed in the present /ase that into2i/ation5 whether ino$untary or  o$untary /annot 0e p$eaded as a defense so as to e2/u$pate the a//used fro! any $ia0i$ity su0=e/t to /ertain /onditions. It wou$d on$y 0e of he$p in !itigating the senten/e.

In Rex v Meade, it was he$d that a person is intended to 4now the /onse9uen/es of his a/t  0ut su/h a presu!ption /an 0e re0utted if the person proes that he was in su/h a state of  into2i/ation so as to 0e/o!e in/apa0$e of 4nowing the /onse9uen/es of his a/t. In Director of Public Prosecution v Beard, it was he$d that se$fBindu/ed into2i/ation is no defense to a /harge of /ri!e5 i.e.5 the a//used gae way to io$ent passion. In Director of Public Prosecution v Majewski, it was he$d that se$fBindu/ed into2i/ation  proides no defense and is irre$eant to offen/es of 0asi/ intent5 su/h as assau$t. In  Bablu alias Mubaraik Hussain v State of Rajasthan, the , he$d that defense of  drun4enness /an 0e aai$ed of on$y when into2i/ation produ/es su/h a /ondition as the a//used $oses the re9uisite intention for the offen/e.

R%"%)R* M%$*&D&L&(

he resear/h !ethodo$ogy e!p$oyed for the pro=e/t on this topi/ is do/trina$ or $i0raryB  0ased !ethodo$ogy. he issues ino$ed5 9uestion of $aw sha$$ 0e identified and ana$yed. he fa/ts sha$$ 0e ana$yed in ter!s of Law. It wi$$ a$so a!ount to signifi/ant 0a/4ground reading on the topi/ on whi/h this ,ase is 0ased upon. L%!"L)$!&N !$%D

Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. -+ Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. :;< Indian Pena$ ,ode5 &-+; s. :;

$%N$)$!% #!#L!&R)4*( •



K.D. Gaur5 1,ri!ina$ Law ,ases and Materia$s35 +th 7dition5 Le2is%e2is "utterworth ?adhwa.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips


Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips


Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in