How Intention and Knowledge Decide the Nature of Culpable Homicide

Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

The bench of Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria in the case of Nandkumar @ Nandu Manilal Mudaliar v. State of Gujarat (2025) converted the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC, recognizing that the act was committed with knowledge but without intention to cause death. 

What was the Background of Nandkumar @ Nandu Manilal Mudaliar v. State of Gujarat (2025) Case? 

• The appellant Nandkumar was convicted by the City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.25 of 1999 for offences under Sections 302 and 504 IPC. 
• He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000 for the murder charge, and rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs.1,000 for the offence under Section 504 IPC. 
• On June 12, 1998, at around 8:00 p.m., the appellant and his brother Tanvel were quarrelling with each other, and Rajesh (nephew of the deceased) intervened, following which the appellant allegedly inflicted knife injuries on Rajesh's thigh. 
• In the intervening night at around 1:00 a.m., the appellant went to the house of deceased Louis Williams, hurled abusive language, and when Louis interfered, the appellant inflicted stab injuries with a knife on the left side of the back and right hand. 
• Louis was taken to L.G. Hospital accompanied by his sister Gajraben (PW 2), and a First Information Report was recorded as per C.R. No.I-107/98 for offences under Sections 324 and 504 IPC. 
• The victim underwent an operation for his injuries and was initially discharged but was readmitted and died on June 26, 1998, while receiving treatment in the hospital. 
• The cause of death was identified as Septicemia (blood poisoning from infected wounds). 
• Following the death, the charge under Section 302 IPC was added to the case. 
• The appellant voluntarily surrendered at the police station on June 29, 1998, bringing the knife used in the attack. 
• The prosecution examined 14 witnesses during the trial, including eyewitnesses Gajraben (sister of deceased) and Rajesh (nephew of deceased). 
• The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 504 IPC but acquitted him under Section 324 IPC. 
• The High Court of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal No.137 of 2000 confirmed the Trial Court's judgment on December 4, 2009. 
• The appellant challenged the High Court's decision before the Supreme Court, which granted leave on June 13, 2014, noting that the appellant had already served more than 14 years in jail and was enlarged on bail. 

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court noted that the appellant inflicted three knife injuries on the deceased, including wounds below the belly and on both hands, which led to death from Septicemia after 13 days of hospital treatment. 
• Citing Kesar Singh v. State of Haryana (2008) and Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1958 SC 465), the Court explained that culpable homicide is the genus and murder is its species, with mens rea being the distinguishing factor. Section 304 Part I applies when there is intention to cause injury likely to cause death but no intention to cause death itself. 
• The Court found that while the injuries were sufficient to cause death and the appellant had knowledge of this, the circumstances showed impulse and anger following an altercation, without premeditation to kill. 
• Key factors included: death after 13 days (not instantaneous), development of septic conditions during treatment, and the cause of death being Septicemia rather than direct injury. 
• The Court converted the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part I IPC, holding the act as 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' since intention to cause death was absent though knowledge existed. The 14 years already served was deemed sufficient. 

What is Culpable Homicide? 

About: 

• Culpable Homicide is one of the gravest offences against the human body.  
• The word culpable comes from the Latin word "culpe”, which signifies punishment. The Latin word “Homo + Cida”, which means human being + killing, is where the term homicide originates. It refers to the killing of a human being by a human being. Homicide may be lawful or unlawful.  

Section 299 of IPC (Section 100 of BNS): 

• This section deals with Culpable homicide.  
• It states that 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. 
• 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. 
• 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 skillful treatment the death might have been prevented.  
• 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.

Essential Ingredients of Culpable Homicide: 

• The following are the essential ingredients of culpable homicide:  
  • A person must be dead.  
  • The death must have been caused by the act of another person.  
  • The act causing death must have been done with:  
    • The intention of causing death; or  
    • The intention of causing bodily injury likely to cause death; or  
    • With the knowledge that such an act is likely to cause death.

Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder:

• Exceptions to Section 300 of IPC, enumerates certain cases in which culpable homicide is not murder:  
  • Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender is deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation and causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident. This exception is subject to the following provisos: 
    • Provocation is not sought or voluntarily pro­voked by the offender.   
    • Provocation is not given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exer­cise of the powers of such public servant. 
    • Provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence. 
  • Culpable homicide is not murder, if it is the exercise of the right to private defence.  
  • Culpable homicide is not murder, if it is done by the public servant acting in good faith.   
  • Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel. 
  • Culpable homicide is not murder when the person whose death is caused, being above the age of eighteen years, suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent.