Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > What are the Ingredients of Crime?
In the last article we have seen what is meant by crime. In this article, we shall study the characteristics or ingredients of crime. Main ingredients of crime are human being, guilty mind (mens rea), Act (Actus Reus), injury to victim of crime, prohibited act and punishment.
List of Sub-Topics:
- Introduction:
- Human Being
- Guilty Mind (Mens Rea)
- Act (Actus Reus)
- injury to Victim of Crime,
- Prohibited Act
- Punishment
- External Consequences
- Relativity
The word crime is difficult to define, but an attempt at definition essentially must precede the study of crime. Legally, a crime is an act made punishable by law. A criminal is one who has committed such a legally forbidden act. Yet there are other criteria which determine whether a person may be dealt with as a criminal. R. C. Nigam (Law of Crimes in India) says that to answer the question, as to what is a crime, it is to be known at first, what is Law because these two questions are interrelated. The law is a command enjoining a course of conduct. A crime may, therefore, be an act of disobedience to such a law forbidding or commanding it. But then, sometimes, disobedience of all laws may not be a crime, for instance, disobedience of civil laws. Therefore, crime would mean something more than mere disobedience of law. Crime may be viewed from various perspectives with the definitions put forth by various jurists or criminologists or sociologists from time to time.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Ingredients of Crime:
Human Being:
The first essential element of the crime is a ‘Human being’. It requires an act to be a crime, it is necessary that the act must be committed by a human being. In ancient times when the criminal law was dominated by the idea of retribution, then the punishments were also inflicted on animals for the injury done by them. But now, if an animal causes injury, the animal is not liable for that act but its owner is liable for it.
Section 2 of Indian Penal Code provides that – “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India”.
Section 11 of Indian Penal Code, which provides that the word ‘Person’ includes a company or association or a body of persons whether incorporated or not. It means the artificial persons are also liable for the breach of the statutory duty imposed on them but they are not liable for the act which can be committed only by the living person as Murder, Rape, and Bigamy etc.
Before industrialization corporates were not considered legal entities. The logic was if corporations didn’t have a soul, they couldn’t be outlawed since outlawry is the act of summoning someone to court and a corporation was not a person who could be compelled to due the same. But the corporations can be punished for not doing their statutory duties.
In R. v. Birmingham Rly. Co, (1840) 2QB 47 case, the Court held the corporation liable for having neglected to repair a highway
In R. v. Great North of Eng. Rly. Co. (1846) 9QB 315 case, the Court held the corporation liable for obstructing a high way whereby public nuisance was created.
In Lennard Carrying Co. Ltd. v. Asiatic Petroleum Co. Ltd, 1915 AC 705 at p. 715 case, it has been held, “A corporation is an abstract. It has no mind of its own any more than it has a body of its own, its acting and directing will must consequently be sought in the person of somebody who is really the directing mind or will of the corporation. The fault of a corporation is, therefore, fault of its superior officers who are the directing mind or will of the corporation.
Thus the first element of crime is human beings and artificial legal entities who must be given appropriate punishment and should be under legal obligation to be held criminally liable.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Guilty Mind (Mens Rea):
‘Mens rea’ is the second and important essential elements of crime. It is also known as ‘evil intent’. A Latin maxim “Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit” means the act itself does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty intent.
In United States v. Currans 290, F. 2 d 751 (3 rd Cir. 1961) case, Biggs, Chief Justice observed: “The Concept of Mens Rea, guilty mind, is based on the assumption that a person has the capacity to control his behaviour and to choose between alternative courses of conduct. This assumption, though not unquestioned by theologians, philosophers, and scientists, is necessary to maintain and administration of social controls. It is only through this assumption that society has found it possible to impose duties and create liabilities designed to safeguard persons and property… Essentially these duties are intended to operate upon the human capacity for choice and control of conduct so as to inhibit and deter socially harmful conduct. When person possessing capacity for choice and control, nevertheless breaches a duty of this type he is subjected to the sanctions of criminal law.”
Mens rea may, however, be direct or implied. Mens rea implies that there must be a state of mind with respect to an actus reus, that is, an intention to act in the prescribed fashion. It is, however, important to distinguish mens rea from motive. Thus, if a person steals away a few loaves of bread from someone’s kitchen to feed a child who is dying of hunger, the motive here may be honourable and understandable, nevertheless the mens rea being to commit the theft, the person would be convicted for theft. His motive may, however, be taken into account in sentencing and he may be less severely punished because of his good motive. In short, motive should be taken into consideration at the sentencing stage and not at the time of deciding the question of mens rea i.e. during the investigation.
If the offender has been found guilty of wrongful intentions, he shall be prosecuted by the court of law. Absence of Guilty intentions may save him from punishment.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Act (actus reus):
‘Actus Reus’ is the third and important essential element of crime. It is the Latin term used to describe a criminal activity and is defined as a criminal activity that was the result of voluntarily bodily movement. This describes a physical Activity that harms another person or damages property. Prof. Kenny has defined it as, “such result of human conduct as the law seeks to prevent.” He was the first writer who uses the term ‘Actus reus’. Russel called it “Physical result of human conduct.” Prof. Jerome Hall said that it is something in addition to a mens rea is required to produce criminal harm.
Only a human being and evil intent are not enough to constitute a crime because you can’t know the intentions of a man. The only intent of a person is not punishable. Intention or mens-rea alone shall not constitute a crime unless it is followed by some external or overt act which is forbidden by some prevailing law. Generally, omitting to do something will not amount to actus resus of an offence. The criminal law usually punishes individuals for positive conduct and not for inaction. There are, however, some notable exceptions. For example, a police officer may have a duty to act to prevent an assault and if he does not, he will be liable to be punished under the law.
Section 32 of the Indian Penal Code provides that “ Words referring to acts include illegal omissions.—In every part of this Code, except where a contrary intention appears from the context, words which refer to acts done extend also to illegal omissions.”
The words ‘illegal or legally bound to do’ have been defined under Section 43 of Indian Penal Code, which provides that – “Illegal”, “Legally bound to do”.—The word “illegal” is applicable to everything which is an offence or which is prohibited by law, or which furnishes ground for a civil action, and a person is said to be “legally bound to do” whatever it is illegal in him to omit.”
So the act or omission must be forbidden by the law and to constitute a crime the intent and act must both concur.
Notes:
- When the criminal actions are involuntary the concept of actus reus is not applied. This includes acts that occur as a result of a spasm, any movement made while a person is asleep or unconscious, or activities participated in while an individual is under a hypnotic trance. In these scenarios a criminal deed may be done, but it is not intentional and the responsible person will not even know about it until after the fact.
- A crime is constituted even though the act is not done with a guilty mind. For Example:- The offence of Bigamy under Section 494 of Indian Penal Code.
- There are some cases although where no injury has been caused to any person but they are Crimes, such as ‘Attempt’, ‘Abetment’ and ‘Conspiracy’.
- There are some crimes where there is neither actus reus nor injury to a human being but still, they are crimes such as making Preparation to commit Dacoity under Section 399 and Assembling for the purpose of Committing Dacoity under section 402 of Indian Penal Code.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Injury to Victim of Crime:
The fourth essential of crime is the ‘Injury’ to another person or to society at large. Such injury must be illegally caused to a person. To constitute a crime, there must always be result brought about human conduct, a physical event which the law prohibits.
The word ‘Injury’ has been defined under Section 44 of Indian Penal Code as “the word ‘injury’ denotes any harm whatever illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property”. Thus, the word ‘injury’ is wide enough to include all injuries caused by tortious act.
The threat of injury is also punishable under the Indian Penal Code as there are three sections in the Code which specifically deals with the threat of injury
- Section 189- Threat of injury to a public servant,
- Section 190 – Threat of injury to induce a person to refrain from applying for protection to a public servant, and
- Section 385- Putting a person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion.
Whenever the crimes are committed, the loss to the person (injury) is stated as a public wrong. The victim’s loss is not that essential to commit a crime, as there are certain crimes on the basis of culture, morality or decency e.g. Adultery.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Prohibited Act:
An offence when committed, ought to have been prohibited under some prevailing law unless specifically mentioned. It is a general rule of criminal law that no offence can be punished retrospectively if the said act did not constitute an offence at the time the said act was committed. The prosecution must prove that the accused party was responsible for a deed prohibited by criminal law. Note that an act, howsoever immoral shall not be an offence unless it is prohibited by law of the land.
No crime is committed when a person exercising his lawful right of private defence cause harm to another. Likewise, if an onlooker who happens to be a good swimmer does not rescue a child about to be drowned in a pond he is not liable for any offence because there was no legal duty on his part to rescue a person.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
Punishment:
The act in order to constitute a crime should not only be prohibited by the law but should also be punishable by the State. The punishment is usually set out in terms of a maximum and the actual punishment in any particular case is left to the discretion of the judge. The punishment ranges from capital punishment to paltry fine. Similarly, it should be ensured that the offender is not subjected to ‘double jeopardy’ i.e. being subjected to double punishment for the same crime. Both, the defence and the prosecution have a right to appeal against the quantum of sentence.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List
External Consequences:
Crime always has a harmful impact on society be it social, personal, mental, or physical.
Relativity:
An activity which is termed as a crime (e.g. alcohol consumption, gambling, etc.) at one place (say public places) may not be crime at the other place.
Click Here to go to Sub-Topic List