The distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder lies in the intention of the accused to cause bodily injury sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

( 1 ) THE Additional Sessions Judge of Kurinool convicted the accused under S. 30 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to death.

( 2 ) THE prosecution case may be stated briefly. About five months prior to the date of the occurrence, Gaffoor Miah, father of the deceased Sathan Miah, rented out a house of his to the father of the accused. At the instigation of Sathar Miah, the lease was terminated and the house was let out of to one Chintalayya. This led to an alteration between the members of the two families. Two months thereafter, a brother of the accused was injured by acid being thrown on him. The accused suspected that the decreased threw the acid. The accuseds father reprimanded him for it. Enraged at the behaviour of the deceased, the accused at about 7-30 A. M. on the 8th of June 1953 followed him when he was going to the Handri river to take his bath, and, in the sands of that river near Gummez beat him on his head with a stick and, after he fell down, turned his face upwards and with a knife cut off his nose. The deceased was later on taken to the hospital, where he died the next day at 5. 30 P. M. The evidence of the witnesses, who have spoken to this version was accepted by the learned Sessions Judge.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the accused did not question the truth of the main events deposed to by the eye witnesses. He argued that, on the facts found, no case of murder has been made out and that the offence would only amount to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

( 4 ) THE difference between the two offences of culpable homicide and murder is fine but real. Culpable nomicide is a generic term. The offence will amount to murder if the conditions laid down in S. 300 are satisfied. If the offence comes under S. 299 or under one or other of the exceptions to S. 300, it will be culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Melvill J. in -- Reg v. Govinda, 1 Bom 342 (A) ablyn analysed the ingredients of the two sections and brought out clearly the difference between them. For convenience of comparision, he has given a table showing the ingredients of the two sections in juxtaposition at page 344, It is not necesary to reproduce the entire table, as on the facts of the preset case, the only relevant clause is the third clause of S. 300, It will be enought if the third clause and the corresepending provisions of S. 299 are extracted. They read : S. 299. S. 300 With the the intention of causing such With the intention of causing bodily bodily injury as is likely to cause death. injury to any person, and the bodily injury intended to be infilcted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause deathdealing with this clause, the learned Judge observed at page 345 :"the offence is culpable homicide if the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is likely to cause death, it is murder, if such injury is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The distinction is fine, but appreciable. It is much the same distinction as that between (c) and (4) already noticed. It is a question of degree of probability. Practically, I think that it will generally resolve itself into a consideration of the nature of the weapon used. A blow from the fist or a stick on a vital part, may be likely to cause death. a wound from a sword in a vital part sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. "we respectfully agree with the analysis. But the example given by the learned Judge is only illustrative. It is for the court to ascertain, on the facts of each case, whether the offence committed is muder or only culpable homicide not amounting to murder. That clause could be invoked only if the intended bodify injury is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. What is the injury intended to be inflicted by the accused can be ascertained, unless the accused admits that he intended to inflict a particular injury, only by the nature of the weapon or weapons used, by the seriouness of the injury

Click Here to Read the rest of this document