Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stages of Crimes PDF
Stages of Crimes PDF
Stages of Crimes PDF
SUBMITTED BY:
AYESHA ALI
B.A. LL.B. (HONS.) 3RD SEMESTER
2ND YEAR
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Among those who have sustained me over the years with their loyalty and
friendship. I express my deep sincere gratitude towards my parents for their
blessing, patience, and moral support in the successful pursuing the LL.B
course. I express my gratitude to my all teachers and friends who has supported
and encouraged me during my study at Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia,
New Delhi.
Ayesha Ali
2ndYear
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. General Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 4
2. History ………………………………………………………………………………...6
3. Definition of Crime…………………………………………………………………... 7
4. Stages of Crime……………………………………………………………………………….11
5. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………...15
6. Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………….16
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS A CRIME? We must answer this question at the outset. In order to
answer this question we must know first, what is law because the two questions
are closely interrelated? Traditionally, we know a law to be a command
enjoining a course of conduct. The command may be of a sovereign or of
political superiors to the political inferiors; or it may be the command of a
legally constituted body or a legislation emanating from a duly constituted
legislature to all the members of the society. A crime may, therefore, be an act of
disobedience to such a law forbidding or commanding it. But then disobedience
of all laws may not be a crime, for instance, disobedience of civil laws or laws
of inheritance or contracts. Therefore, a crime would mean something more than
a mere disobedience to a law, "it means an act which is both forbidden by law
and revolting to the moral sentiments of the society." Thus robbery or murder
would be a crime, because they are revolting to the moral sentiments of the
society, but a disobedience of the revenue laws or the laws of contract would not
constitute a crime. Then again, "the moral sentiments of a society" is a flexible
term, because they may change, and they do change from time to time with the
growth of the public opinion and the social necessities of the times. So also, the
moral values of one country may be and often are quite contrary to the moral
values of another country. To cite a few instances, heresy was a crime at one
time in most of the countries of the world, because in those days it offended the
moral sentiments of the society. It was punished with burning. But nobody is
punished nowadays for his religious beliefs, not even in a theocratic state. The
reason is obvious. Now it does not offend the moral sentiments of the society.
Adultery is another such instance. It is a crime punishable under our Penal
Code, but it is not so in some of the countries of the West. Then again sati, i.e.,
burning of a married woman on the funeral pyre of her deceased husband, was
for a long time considered to be a virtue in our own country, but now it is a
crime. Similarly, polygamy was not a crime in our country until it was made so
by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This Act, it may be stated, does not apply to
Mohammedans or Christians. But Christians are forbidden to practice polygamy
under their law of marriage, while Mohammedans are yet immune from
punishment for polygamy. All these instances go to show that the content of
crime changes from time to time in the same country and from country to
country at the same time because it is conditioned by the moral value approved
of by a particular society in a particular age in a particular country. A crime of
yesterday may become a virtue tomorrow and so also a virtue of yesterday may
become acrime tomorrow. Such being the content of crime, all attempts made
from time to time beginning with Blackstone down to Kenny in modern times to
define it have proved abortive. Therefore, the present writer agrees with Russell
when he observes that "to define crime is a task which so far has not been
satisfactorily accomplished by any writer. In fact, criminal offences are
basically the creation of the criminal policy adopted from time to time by those
sections of the community who are powerful or astute enough to safeguard their
own security and comfort by causing the sovereign power in the state to repress
conduct which they feel may endanger their position". But a student embarking
on study of principles of criminal law must understand the chief characteristics
and the true attributes of a crime. Though a crime, as we have seen, is difficult
of a definition in the true sense of the term, a definition of a crime must give us
"the whole thing and the sole thing," telling us something that shall be true of
every crime and yet not be true of any other conceivable non-criminal breach of
law. We cannot produce such a definition of crime as might be flexible enough
to be true in all countries, in all ages and in all times. Nevertheless, a crime may
be described and its attributes and characteristics be clearly understood. In order
to achieve this object, we propose to adopt two ways, namely, first, we shall
distinguish crime from civil and moral wrongs, and secondly, we shall critically
examine all the definitions constructed by the eminent criminal jurists from time
to time.
Criminal law is a body of rules and statutes that defines conduct prohibited by
the state because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare and that
establishes punishment to be imposed for the commission of such acts. Criminal
law differs from civil law, whose emphasis is more on dispute resolution than in
punishment.
The term criminal law generally refers to substantive criminal laws. Substantive
criminal laws define crimes and prescribe punishments. In contrast, Criminal
Procedure describes the process through which the criminal laws are enforced.
For example, the law prohibiting murder is a substantive criminal law. The
manner in which state enforces this substantive law—through the gathering of
evidence and prosecution—is generally considered a procedural matter.
History
The first civilizations generally did not distinguish between civil law and
criminal law. The first written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians
around 2100-2050 BC. Another important early code was the Code Hammurabi,
which formed the core of Babylonian law. These early legal codes did not
separate penal and civil laws. Of the early criminal laws of Ancient Greece only
fragments survive, e.g. those of Solon and Draco.
After the revival of Roman law in the 12th century, sixth-century Roman
classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction
between criminal and civil law in European law from then until the present
time. The first signs of the modern distinction between crimes and civil matters
emerged during the Norman invasion of England. The special notion of criminal
penalty, at least concerning Europe, arose in Spanish Late Scolasticism, when
the theological notion of God's penalty (poenaaeterna) that was inflicted solely
for a guilty mind, became transfused into canon law first and, finally, to secular
criminal law. The development of the state dispensing justice in a court clearly
emerged in the eighteenth century when European countries began maintaining
police services. From this point, criminal law had formalized the mechanisms
for enforcement, which allowed for its development as a discernible entity.
Definition of Crime
Many jurists have defined crime in their own ways some of which are as under:
Many prominent jurists have made attempts to define Crime: Sir William
Blackstone in his classical work, Commentaries on the Laws of England,
Volume IV, which is devoted to ―Public Wrongs or Crimes, attempted to define
crime at two different places in his work. We shall examine both these
definitions given by him. At one place, he states that crime is an act committed
or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it. Here in
defining crime Blackstone uses "public law." Now what is meant by public law?
It has several accepted meanings. For instance, Austin takes public law as
identical with constitutional law. In that sense, the definition given by him
would cover only political offences which are only a very small portion of the
whole field of crime. If we were to follow Austin and interpret the definition
given by Blackstone as violation of our constitutional law, namely, Articles 21
and 31, which guarantee protection of one's life, liberty and property, even then
the definition of crime would remain too narrow. The Germans, on the other
hand, interpret "public law" to mean both constitutional law and criminal law. In
this sense, thedefinition given by Blackstone ceases to define because we shall
be using criminal law in defining a crime. Then again, some take "public law"
to mean positive law or municipal law, which would mean all laws made by the
state. In that sense, the definition given by Blackstone obviously become too
wide, for the crime will include every legal wrong or violation of law.
Therefore, this definition given by Blackstone is not satisfactory.
Now we pass on to the second definition given by the same jurist, Blackstone.
He defines crime as ―a violation of the public rights and duties due to the
whole community considered as a community. This definition has been slightly
altered by the learned editor of Blackstone, Serjeant Stephen, who expresses it
thus: A crime is a violation of a right considered in reference to the evil
tendency of such violation as regards the community at large.
Human being
Mensrea or guilty intention
Actus reus or illegal act or omission
Injury to another human being
Human Being
The first element requires that the wrongful act must be committed by a human
being. In ancient times, when criminal law was largely dominated by the idea of
retribution, punishments were inflicted on animals also for the injury caused by
them, for example, a pig was burnt in Paris for having devoured a child, a horse
was killed for having kicked a man. But now, if an animal causes an injury we
hold not the animal liable but its owner liable for such injury.
So the first element of crime is a human being who- must be under the legal
obligation to act in a particular manner and should be a fit subject for awarding
appropriate punishment.
Section 11 of the Indian Penal Code provides that word ‘person’ includes a
company or association or body of persons whether incorporated or not. The
word ‘person’ includes artificial or juridical persons.
Mens Rea
There is a well-known maxim in this regard, i.e. “actus non facitreum nisi mens
sit rea” which means that, the guilty intention and guilty act together constitute
a crime. It comes from the maxim that no person can be punished in a
proceeding of criminal nature unless it can be showed that he had a guilty mind.
The third essential element of a crime is actus reus. In other words, some overt
act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of the guilty intention.
Actus reus is the manifestation of mens rea in the external world. Prof. Kenny
was the first writer to use the term ‘actus reus’. He has defined the term thus-
“such result of human conduct as the law seeks to prevent”.
Injury
Stages of Crime
There are four stages in commission of a Crime. If a person commits a crime
voluntarily or after preparation the doing of it involves four different stages. In
every crime, there is first intention to commit it, secondly, preparation to
commit it, thirdly, attempt to commit it and fourthly the accomplishment. The
stages can be explained as under-
Attempt
It is also known as the 'Preliminary Crime'.
Section XXIII of the IPC, 1860 deals with 'of Attempt to Commit Offences'
and provides the punishment for attempt.
Attempt is the direct movement towards the commission of a crime after the
preparation is made. According to English law, a person may be guilty of an
attempt to commit an offence if he does an act which is more than merely
preparatory to the commission of the offence; and a person will be guilty of
attempting to commit an offence even though the facts are such that the
commission of the offence is impossible.
Attempt Under The Indian Penal Code, 1860- The Indian Penal Code has
dealt with attempt in the following four different ways-
· Completed offences and attempts have been dealt with in the same section and
same punishment is prescribed for both. Such provisions are contained in
Sections 121, 124, 124-A, 125, 130, 131, 152, 153-A, 161, 162, 163, 165, 196,
198, 200, 213, 240, 241, 251, 385, 387, 389, 391, 394, 395, 397, 459 and 460.
· Fourthly, all other cases [where no specific provisions regarding attempt are
made] are covered under section 511 which provides that the accused shall be
punished with one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for the
offence or with prescribed fine or with both.
1. Websites
1. http://www.lawnotes.in/
2. http://www.legalservicesindia.com/
3. us.sagepub.com
2. Books