Hello, in this post the elements of crime and the types of elements of crime according to the Indian Penal Code have been explained, which is very important for law students and the general public, please read it.

Introduction – Elements of crime

As we all know that human is a social animal who wants to live his life in ideal form. He does not want any person to do such work which is against the work law and create hindrance in his livelihood. It would be important for us to know that any act or omission is not automatically a crime in itself, because if it were so then all the activities of our daily life would also come under the category of crime.

In relation to crime, there are some acts which are done intentionally by a human being for his own benefit and there are also some acts which are done unknowingly. Similarly, a human does some work with goodwill and voluntarily, while some work is also done due to compulsion. Behind such actions, there is mischief and goodwill of the human being, due to which someone gets loss and someone gets benefit.

Read also – What is juvenile delinquency? Introduction, Definition, Causes And Prevention

The main objective of the penal law in our law is to eliminate crime from the society. According to the definition of jurists and criminologists, there are some things which we call ‘Elements of Crime‘ in legal language to make an “act or omission” a crime or not.

The main elements of the crime

(a) the offense has been committed by a person who is under a legal obligation to act in a particular manner and is liable to the imposition of appropriate punishment,

(b) there must be mens rea involved in the act done by such person,

(c) such act or omission is committed in pursuance of malice,

(d) and as a result of such act any harm has been caused to human society or community.

Read also – What is Regulating Act 1773? Its main provisions | Describe the features and demerits

Hall has mainly given seven elements of crime-

(a) The doing of an act intentionally or unintentionally.

(b) Any act done with mala fide or criminal intent.

(c) Misbehavior and conduct in an act together means co-occurrence.

(d) That any such act causes some extraneous consequence or loss and such loss is prohibited by law.

(e) There should be a causal relation between the voluntary conduct and the harm prohibited by the law and there should be a punishment prescribed by the law for such an act.

Elements of crime according to Huda

(a) The person is liable to do a particular act and his competence is the subject of appropriate punishment.

(b) mala fide or criminal intent in any act and,

(c) the doing of an act when impelled with such intention,

(d) causing any harm to the general public or to any particular person by such act.

Mental elements of crime

Mental elements play an important role in the commission of a crime by a person. These elements determine the principles in criminal law. In this way, the main mental elements of crime are considered as follows –

(i) Intention

(ii) Motive

(iii) Men’s rea

(iv) knowledge

(v) innocence

(vi) Mistake of fact

(vii) Mistake of law

Elements of crime in Indian law

In Indian law, the elements of crime are not specifically described separately, but the elements of each crime are described along with it. Which have been mentioned in brief.

(i) the act or omission of

This is the first essential element of crime. ‘Act’ or ‘omission’ is an act or omission by a person to do an act or refrain from doing an act which is to be done.

In short – doing any work by a person which is prohibited by law, that is, the work which the law does not give the right to do and not doing any such work by a person which he is bound by law to do. Both the above types of acts come under the category of ‘crime’.

Example – No person has the right to confine another person within a certain limit. However, if he voluntarily confines any person within certain limits, he shall be deemed to be guilty of ‘wrongful confinement’.

It would be appropriate to clarify here that, it is necessary to commit a criminal act by a human being, but in ancient times, the act of animals was also considered a criminal act and along with that animal, its owner was also punished. example –

In Jewish law, Moses ordered –

“If a bull gores a man or a woman and he dies, that bull shall be stoned to death and its meat shall not be eaten, but the owner of the bull shall be innocent.”

But later on, the owner of the bullock was also made responsible.

“If the bull was already in the habit of horning and its owner had knowledge of this habit and still did not keep the bull under control and control, as a result of which it killed a man and a woman, then that bull should be stoned. shall be put to death and its master shall also be put to death.”

Now at present only human beings are punished. The key assumption behind this is believed to be the element of “criminal mindset”.

(ii) Competence –

It is necessary for the criminal person to be ‘capable’ of committing a crime. Here competence means ‘legal competence’. A person may be physically or materially competent to do an act, but legally the same person may not be considered competent.

Example – A child below the age of seven years can cause any harm to any person, but it is not considered an offense under section 82 of the Penal Code. Similarly, many other exceptions have been mentioned in the code which do not come under the category of ‘crime’.

For example, act done by a person of unsound mind, act done in good faith, act done by accident, act done under mistake of fact, etc. Thus, an act can be considered as ‘crime’ only when it falls within the limits of crime in all respects.

(a) Mistake of Law –

Regarding the mistake of law, an accepted principle is that – mistake of fact is forgivable, but mistake of law cannot be forgivable. This doctrine is based on the principle that ” ignorantia juris non excusat” ie “ignorance of law is no excuse”.

It is generally assumed that every person has knowledge of the law and cannot escape by resorting to ignorance of the law.

Example – Murder is a crime. Therefore, no person, who has committed the offense of murder, can argue in his defense that he was not aware of the rule of law that murder is a statutory offense and the person who commits murder is punished.

In this regard, the Supreme Court said that – “Although it is very difficult to reach the place of crime of the latest constitutional statutes, that is, it is impossible for every person to know about a statute as soon as it is made, yet no person can be punished because of this ignorance.” Can’t escape.” (State of Maharashtra vs M.H. George)

Lord Ellenbra has said about mistake of law, “If ignorance of law is allowed to be a defense in order to avoid the most serious cases, it cannot be said how far the excuse of ignorance will go.

(b) Mistake of fact –

Mistake of fact is based on the formula that- “Ignorantia facit excusat” ie ignorance of fact is a good excuse. Mistake of fact is excusable and may be a good ground of defence.

According to section 76 of the Indian Penal Code –

“Nothing is an offense which is done by a person who is bound by law to do it or who, by mistake of fact and not by mistake of law, in good faith believes that he is bound by law to do it. bound.”

There is an important episode of ‘Gopaliya Kalia’ in this regard. In this, a police officer goes to Bombay to arrest a person under warrant. After reasonable inquiry and believing in good faith that the person to be arrested is there, he arrests the complainant. The complainant proceeds against that police officer for ‘wrongful confinement’. It was held that the police officer being protected under this section was not guilty of any offence. (1923, 26 Bombay LR 138)

(iii) Aim, intention and intention to be –

‘Motive’, ‘Intention’ and ‘Mens Rea’ have an important place in the element of crime. These elements are also called ‘mental elements’ of the crime. 1

(a) Objective – In simple words, the meaning of ‘objective’ is – ‘goal’ or ‘objective’. There is always some ‘objective’ or ‘target’ behind almost all kinds of work. No work is done aimlessly or aimlessly. When a person commits an act in the culmination of a goal, it can come under the category of ‘crime’.

Example – A dispute arose between A and B regarding a transaction and both became enemies. A kills B in revenge of enmity. Here ‘revenge for enmity’ will be considered as A’s ‘object’.

Whatever the ‘goal’ may be, moral-immoral, legal-illegal, good-bad, we cannot consider any work as a crime just by ‘goal’. If the means of achieving the ‘object’ are ‘against the law’ then this ‘object’ will come under the ambit of crime.

For example, our goal is to establish socialism, eliminate economic inequality, eliminate capitalists, etc. But if we resort to ‘violence’ to achieve this, then this ‘goal’ of ours will go into the category of crime, even if No matter how pure our goal is.

In simple words – both ‘goal’ and ‘means’ together constitute a crime and if ‘goal’ is pious then ‘means’ should also be pious, so that it does not come under the category of crime. Similarly, the ‘goal’ itself must be compatible with the law. Bad goals cannot be accomplished even with good means.

(b) intention – The next step to ‘goal’ is intention. To put ‘object’ into action is considered to be its ‘intention’. Like – ‘revenge of enmity’ is the aim of a person and to cause death is the intention of that person.

According to Austin – intention is the goal of action and object means the purpose of which it is the source. Proximate intention is an accessory to the wrongful act. Remote ‘intention’ or purpose is that part of the whole intention which is outside the purview of the wrongful act. The burden of proving ‘intent’ is on the prosecution.

(c) Misery – ‘Malice’ means ‘malicious’ or ‘criminal intent’. Often, no act is considered a crime until it is done with ‘mischief’. ‘Malice’ is an essential condition for the constitution of the offence. It is based on the principle of English law that Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. That is, “Mere act without intention does not make a person criminal.”

Example – A hunter mistaking a man hiding behind a bush for an animal shoots at him and kills him. Here, in spite of having committed the crime, he will be kept free from criminal responsibility, because he had no mala fide in his mind.

But in Indian law almost every such act which is illegal by law is regarded as an ‘offence’, whether there is ‘malice’ behind it or not. It has been placed under the principle of ‘Strict Liability’. Where an act is to be done under a statute and it is not done, it shall be deemed to be an offence, even though there may be complete absence of ‘malice’.

Since the essential elements of each offense are mentioned in the Indian law, therefore ‘mischief’ as an element is not separately described.

(iv) Causing damage or loss –

Damage is also an essential element in the element of crime. Any act or omission done by a person which causes harm to the person or the general public, that act will be considered as a crime. The nature of damage or loss can be social, personal, mental.

From this it is proved that, to constitute an offence, there must be injury. Damage or loss has been defined in section 44 of the Indian Penal Code, according to –

“The word damage denotes any harm caused illegally to any person in body, mind, reputation or property.” The following elements are present in the damage –

(a) Causing injury to any person,

(b) such injury being lawfully caused, and

(c) – such injury being to body, mind, property or reputation.

(v) Knowingly or voluntarily –

‘Knowledge’ or ‘willingness’ is also an important element of the offence, if it is essential to the offense to be so proved.

(vi) Be punishable by law —

For such an act which is prohibited by the law, there should be provision of punishment in the penal law. For an act to be a crime, it is not enough that it is prohibited by law, but there should also be a provision for punishment for its violation. In fact, this element of criminal law gives criminal law a different identity from civil law.

Section 53 to section 75 of the Indian Penal Code describes the punishment method, according to this code, pain in relation to body and property is called punishment, which results in the society on the person who is punished by the law. has been convicted of an offense under Mainly five purposes of punishment have been considered, which are also called principles of punishment.

(iv) Difference between intent and purpose –

Following are the differences between Intention and Motive :-

(a) Intention is the action of the will which directs a direct action, while motive is the impulse which prompts the action of the will.

(b) Intent indicates a proximate object while causative indicates a remote object at the root of the intention.

(c) Intent is the means while reason is the end

(d) Intent is the goal of an action while cause is its source.

Effect of malice in the Indian Penal Code –

Despite ‘Durashay’ being a part of criminal jurisprudence, it has not been mentioned in detail in the Indian Penal Code. It does not mean that the Indian Penal Code has not considered it as an element of crime. In fact, the words ‘Voluntarily’, ‘Intentionally’, ‘Fraudulently’ and ‘Dishonestly’ have been used in place of the word ‘Mischief’ in the Indian Penal Code. Apart from this, many other such words have been used in the code, which are the symbol of ‘misery’.

Like – ‘Corruptly’ (Malignantly), ‘Wantonly’, ‘Rashly’, ‘Negligently’ etc.

According to Huda, the word ‘Malice’ has the same meaning as the word ‘Malicious’ and the word ‘Dissoluteness’ has the same meaning as the word ‘Reckless’. The words ‘haste’ and ‘neglect’ also indicate a guilty mind.

Renowned jurist MC Sitalwad accepted this statement in his book ‘Common Law in India’ that, in India, the principle of guilty mind has been included in the legal definitions of crimes, so now there is no need for its enforcement separately. has gone.

In the case of ‘State of Maharashtra Vs Meyer Hans George‘, the Supreme Court held that “an accused cannot be deemed to be guilty of an offense unless the law has refused to regard malice as an essential element of the offence”. Could, if his mind had not been guilty.” (AIR 1965 SC 722)

In India, fraudulent or dishonest intention is considered necessary in cases of ‘chhal’ (cheating), criminal breach of trust (criminal breach of trust) etc. Similarly, in the cases of ‘Forgery’, preparation of false document and intent to cause harm to someone with such document has been considered essential.

(V) Conclusion –

Thus, on the basis of the above analysis, we know that for the completion of any crime, it is necessary to prove the following statements –

(1) That the offense was committed by at least one person,

(2) That the person had capacity to commit the offence,

(3) That the offense was committed under a mala fide,

(4) That the offense was committed in furtherance of a definite object

(5) That the misdemeanor was clearly influenced by malice,

(6) that the offense was injurious to society, and

(7) Such offense is punishable by law.

Related Post –

Note – If there is a need for amendment in the post, do share it and subscribe to the blog to get information related to the law.

Reference :- Indian Penal Code (Dr. Basanti Lal Babel) 22nd edition, (Dr. Y.S. Sharma)