My notes are often very ugly 😂 this semester I haven’t had the time nor the energy to try to make everything look pretty. And that is okay.
Honestly this past week has kind of been a nightmare. The middle of the semester along with a COVID scare is no joke!!
Shadows looked cute today
Int. Business notes from today
Afternoon treat for finishing 1/5 exams
Monday morning work.
Planning revision and writing out timetables
07.04.2020 | Quarantine
Like everyone, I am currently in quarantine and doing online classes. Not easy to be honest, the motivation is hard to find.
I think establishing a routine helps me, personnaly with keeping up the work!
28.01.2020 | New year
I have been trying to stay on top of all my readings, with the start of the new semmester, but it has been hard.
I have a lot of readings and sometimes, you have to prioritize and some things get left behind…
Day 8 / 100
Today has had some of the most dreadful weather I’ve seen in a good while. So nothing beats finding a nice warm study spot accompanied with some hot chocolate.
Now it is time to go and be inducted in XRD and then on to my finance and law lectures.
An impromptu studyblr pic. Currently slogging it through law revision for a Chartered Accountants Ireland CAP1 Law Exam that I’ve pulled forward to September rather than sitting through Friday night lectures of stuff I already know for 8 months. It’s going to be a challenging couple of weeks since I’m working full time with only a week’s study leave, but I’m sure I can do it!
Listening to: The Dressmaker movie score
Culpable Homicide and Murder sec 299-304(IPC)
Cases of homicide ( killing of human being , by another human being) punishable under the IPC are, culpable homicide not amounting to murder (sec 299 of IPC), murder ( sec 300 of the IPC), rash or negligent homicide (sec 304A of the IPC), and suicide (sec 305-306 of the IPC).
Culpable Homicide under sec 299 of the IPC is the causing of death by doing of,
An act with the intention of causing death,
An act with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death and
, An act with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death.In the absence of any of the above, an act resulting in the death of a Pearson would not constitute culpable homicide. The provision further provides three explanations wherein the presence or absence of factors in causing death nevertheless constitutes culpable homicide.
Illustration: A lays sticks and turf over a pit with intention of thereby causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be there by caused, Z be living the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. A has committed the offence of culpable homicide. To invoke this provision death must be said to have been caused. It is immaterial if the person whom the accused intended to kill was not killed and that some other person was killed. The offence is completed as soon as a person was killed. The death must be a proximate and not remote consequence of an act of violence.
Sec 300 of the IPC classifies a culpable homicide as ‘murder’, where:
Firstly if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death,
Secondly, if it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to who the harm is caused by death,
Thirdly if it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or
Fourthly if the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury.
Therefore, every murder is culpable homicide but every culpable homicide is not murder.
A lays sticks and turf over a pit with intention of thereby causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be there by caused, Z believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. Now, this is culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
WHY: Intention - Yes.Death - Yes.The degree to the certainty of death - Not so much. (There is always the chance that you may notice the pit. Or even after falling, you may not die.)
Now A took his gun and went to B’s house. B opened the door and A shoot 5 bullets right into the B’s head. B was killed on the spot. Now, this is Culpable Homicide amount to Murder.
WHY: Intention - Yes.Death - Yes.The degree to the certainty of death - Most certain.
The doctrine of LATIN MAXIM “actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea”
The fundamental reason for having a system of Criminal Law is to provide a framework for the punishment of wrongdoers by the state and thereby to preserve an acceptable degree of social order.
For an act to attract liability, the fundamental principle is that there must be Wrongful act(actus reus) combined with a wrongful intention(mens rea). This principle reflected in the Latin maxim “actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea”. The maxim translates to mean an act does not make one guilty unless the mind is also legally blameworthy.
In other words, for an act to be termed a crime it must be accompanied with the necessary mental element which would give a criminal due to the act. Unless this mental element is present, no act is usually criminal in nature.
“mens rea” or the mental element of an offence has earlier been seen of any as an essential element of any offence. Offences under the IPC are qualified with the terms that indicate they require a mental element or a state of mind to be determined before a person can be said to have committed that offence. These words include “dishonesty”, “fraudulently”, “a reason to believe”,, “voluntarily”, “maliciously”.
In katar Sigh vs the State of Punjab, 1994(3) SCC 569, the Supreme Court held that the element of “mens rea” must be read into statutory penal provision unless a statute either expressly or by necessary implication rules out.