DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

LUCKNOW

2021-22

INDIAN PENAL CODE

FINAL DRAFT ON
OFFENCES AGAINST HUMAN BODY

Submitted by – Submitted to –

Saurabh Yadav Dr. Malay Pandey

B.A.LLB (Hon) Semester V Asst. Professor (Law)

En. No. -190101131

 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to extend my sincere thanks to

My teacher and my mentor Dr. Malay Pandey for giving me this

wonderful opportunity to work on this project and for his able guidance
and advice,

Vice Chancellor, Prof. Subir Kr. Bhatnagar and Dean (Academics),

Professor C.M. Jariwala for their encouragement and Enthusiasm;

My seniors for sharing their valuable tips;

And my classmates for there constant support.

 3

Contents

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................4

TABLE OF CASES.........................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................6

OFFENCE AGAINST HUMAN BODY.........................................................................................7

Section 300 murder......................................................................................................................9

Difference between culpable homicide and murder-.................................................................11

Section 350 criminal force.........................................................................................................12

Section 375: Rape......................................................................................................................13

Section 498a husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.................14

CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................16

BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................17
 4

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

I have used Descriptive Research Method. The source of data is majorly secondary data, and this
research is descriptive in nature. For data collection mainly the judgement, National &
International books, magazines & newspapers, Reports prepared by research scholars, were
referred.

OBJECTIVE

 The objective of this report is to understand what are the offense which affect the human body. 

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
1. What is crime against body?
2. What are the elements of that crimes?

COVERAGE & SCOPE

The researcher has tried to analyse the topic by studying thoroughly what are the crimes against
human body and what are its elements and has also referred to Books of various authors and
experts in this field. 
 5

TABLE OF CASES

Arun vyas v anita vyas...............................................................................................................................14

Bhanwar singh and others vs state of madhya pradesh...............................................................................9
Dilip kumar & anr vs state of west bengal.................................................................................................10
Dukhi singh vs state...................................................................................................................................10
Joginder singh v. State of punjab.................................................................................................................7
Kalar din v. Emperor.................................................................................................................................12
Kesar singh v state of haryana....................................................................................................................8
Mangiram v. Emperor...............................................................................................................................12
Narayana  nair vs the state of travancore..................................................................................................10
Ram das v state of west bengal..................................................................................................................12
Ranbir singh & ors vs state of haryana.......................................................................................................9
S.p malik v state of orissa..........................................................................................................................13
Uttar pradesh v chholey lal.......................................................................................................................14
 6

INTRODUCTION

Human beings, who claim to be the only intelligible species on earth, believe that they have hum
anity within them, but the fact is that the people of the 21st century are those who have no human
istic approach; they are selfcentered.We just think about themselves and can go to any degree to 
accomplish what they want; even to hurt the other person. We just think about thems We just
think about themselves and can go to any degree to accomplish what they want; even to hurt the
other person.

Offences against human body starting from section 299 to 377 of IPC it consist of 88 sections
out of 550 sections, this is the largest part of the code 1. It clearly shows the attachment and
preservation of personal life and liberty- the two most important and crucial rights guaranteed
under Indian Constitution.

This project covers major offence which affect the human body. For instance it aims at
protecting the primary personal right to life, liberty, security of person, freedom of moment and
enjoyment of one’s person against intentional invasion by others.2

This section of the Code includes wide range of offences which inter alia include Murder,
Culpable Homicide, Assault, Kidnapping, Abduction, Rape, Sexual Offence, Unnatural Offence.

1
K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)

/
2
2.K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)
 7

OFFENCE AGAINST HUMAN BODY

Section 299 culpable homicide

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.

Illustrations

(a) a lays sticks and turf over a pit, with the intention of thereby causing death, or with the
knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused. Z believing the ground to be firm, treads on
it, falls in and is killed. A has committed the offence of culpable homicide.

(b) a knows z to be behind a bush. B does not know it, a, intending to cause, or knowing it to be
likely to cause z's death, induces b fires and kills z. Here b may be guilty of no offence; but a has
committed the offence of culpable homicide.

Culpable homicide and murder are the gravest of offences against a human being. The word
homicide has been derived from the latin word 'homo', which mean a man, and 'caedere' which
means to cut or kill. Thus, homicide means the killing of a human being by a human being.3

Who so ever causes death-

/In order to hold a person liable under the impugned section there must be causing of death of a
h/uman being as defined under section 46 of the code. The causing of death of a child in the
m/other’s womb is not homicide as stated in explanation 3 appended to section 299, i.p.c. But the
pe/rson would not be set free. He would be punishable for causing miscarriage either under
section 312 or 315 i.p.c depending on the gravity of the injury. The act of causing death amounts
to culpable homicide if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not
have breathed or been completely born. The clause ‘though the child may not have breathed’
suggests that a child may be born alive, though it may not breath (respire), or it may respire so
imperfectly that it may be difficult to obtain clear proof that respiration takes place. Causing of
death must be of a living human being which means a living man, woman, child and at least
partially an infant under delivery or just delivered.4

In joginder singh v. State of punjab5 , the deceased Rupinder singh had teased the sister of the
accused. In retaliation, the two accused went to rupinder's house and shouted that they had come
to take away the sister of rupinder sigh. In the meantime, the cousins of rupinder singh
intervened. One of them was given a blow on the neck by the accused. Meanwhile, rupinder
3
K D Gaur, Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Eighth Edition, 2015, Lexis Nexis
4
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/culpable-homicide-582-1.html
5
AIR 1979 SC 1876, Cr LJ1406 (SC)
 8

singh started running towards the field. The accused started chasing him and rupinder singh
jumped into a well. As a result of this, he sustained head injuries, which made him loose
consciousness and thereafter he died due to drowning. The supreme court held that the accused
were 15 to 20 feet from rupinder singh, when he jumped into the well. There was no evidence to
show that the accused drove rupinder singh into the well or that they left him no option but to
jump into the well. Under these circumstances, it was held that the accused could have caused
the death of rupinder singh, and hence they were entitled to be acquitted of the charge of murder.

With the knowledge which is likely to cause death-

‘knowledge’ is a strong word and imports certainty and not merely a probability. Here
knowledge refers to the personal knowledge of the person who does the act 6. If the death is
caused under circumstances specified under section 80, the person causing the death will be
exonerated under that section. But, if it is caused in doing an unlawful act, the question arises
whether he should be punished for causing it. The code says that when a person engaged in the
commission of an offence, without any addition on account of such accidental death. The offence
of culpable homicide supposes an intention, or knowledge of likelihood of causing death. In the
absence of such intention or knowledge, the offence committed may be grievous hurt, or simple
hurt. It is only where death is attributed to an injury which the offender did not know would
endanger life would be likely to cause death and which in normal conditions would not do so
notwithstanding death being caused, that the offence will not be culpable homicide but grievous
or simple hurt. Every such case depends upon the existence of abnormal conditions unknown to
the person who inflicts injury. Once it is established that an act was a deliberate act and not the
result of accident or rashness or negligence, it is obvious that the offence would be culpable
homicide.7

In kesar singh v state of haryana8 court said knowledge denotes a bare state of conscious
awareness of certain facts in which the human mind might itself remain supine and inactive
whereas intention connotes a conscious state in which mental faculties are roused into activity
and summed up into action for the deliberate purpose of being directed towards a particular and
specified end which the human mind conceives and perceives before itself.

Section 300 murder

Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the
death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or

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 whom the harm is caused, or
6
K D Gaur, Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Eighth Edition, 2015, Lexis Nexis,
7
: http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/culpable-homicide-582-1.html
8
(2008) 15 SCC 753
 9

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 as aforesaid.

Illustrations

(a) a shoots z with the intention of killing him. Z dies in consequence. A commits murder.

(d) a without any excuse fires a loaded cannon into a crowd of persons and kills one of them. A
is guilty of murder, although he may not have had a premeditated design to kill any particular
individual.

There are certain exception to this section where offende is not guilty for committing murder-

Grave and sudden provocation-

When the person who loses his selfcontrol as a result of the sudden and severe provocation cause
s the death of the person who gave the provocation or any other person as a result of a mistake or 
an accident, then he will be responsible for the guilty person not amounting to murder.

When person exceeds his right of self defense-

When the person has good faith in exercising his or her right to private protection of property or i
ndividual exceeds the power given to him and thereby causes the death of the person against who
m he or she exercises his or her right without any reason or intention to do anything else appropri
ate for that purpose. 

If the accused exceeds his right of private defence intentionally then he will be liable for murder
but if it is unintentionally then he will be liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder

In the case of ranbir singh & ors vs state of haryana 9

The court held that the burden of proving self-defence is on the accused. Such burden can be
reduced by establishing a mere preponderance of probabilities either by laying the basis for that
plea in the cross-examination of the prosecution witness or by adducing the defence evidence.

In the case of  bhanwar singh and others vs state of madhya pradesh

The court held that in order to take the benefit of this exception it is necessary to prove that the
accused had the right of self-defence against the accused and this right extends to causing the
death of the person. If this is proved then it would result in the application of section 300
exception 2. The court may reject the plea on the ground that the right to private defence exists
9
2008, PH 1344,Manu
 10

but more harm was caused than was necessary or the right of private defence do not exceed
causing the death of a person.

When public servent exceeds its power-

When any public servant or individual licensed by the public servant acts for the sake of justice a
nd abuses their powers causing the death of a person who, in bonafide intent, believes to be lawf
ul and considers necessary in order to perform his duties as a public servant and without ill treat
ment of the person whose death is caused.

Example:–  a, police constable went to arrest the person. The arrested person was trying to
abscond it. The police officer shoots him. A is not liable for murder.

Dukhi singh vs state

Facts: the appellant, a constable of railway protection force( rff) while discharging his duty
shoots a fireman unintentionally. He fired a shot to catch the thief who was trying to run.

Judgement: the court held that the constable is entitled to the benefit of this section.

Sudden fight-

Sudden struggle means a sudden or premeditated struggle. None of the parties intended to kill or 
cause another person's death. That which party first assaulted or gave a provocation is not an imp
ortant fact. In this happen at that very moment without any prior planning. And the magnitude of
thata sudden anger should be of the same magnitude or nature.

Dilip kumar & anr vs state of west bengal 

Facts: the appellants had been objecting when the deceased uses his filed for the purpose of
ingress or egress of the bullock cart. The complainant party armed with deadly weapon passed
his bullock cart. There was a sudden fight and as a result of a fight, the appellant and other two
accused person were injured they killed the deceased.

Judgement: the court considering the circumstances of the case held that this case will fall under
this exception and the appellant will be liable under section 204 of  indian penal code.

. In the case of narayana  nair vs the state of travancore

The court held that “ the fight must be with the person killed” in order to cover the case  within
the ambit of this exception.

Consent-
 11

When the person gives consent to cause his /her death then it will be a culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. But the person who gives the consent should be major and the consent
needs to be free that means without any force.

Difference between culpable homicide and murder-

According to the james sthepen the definition of culpable homicide and murder are the weakest
part of the code as they defined in form closely resembling with each other and at times it
become difficult to distinguish between the two.10

The case which clearly, distinguish these two section is- reg v govinda in this case the prisoner,
a young man of 18, kicked his wife and struck her several times with his fist on the back. These
blows seemed to have caused her no serious injury. She, however, fell on the ground and then the
accused put one knee on her chest, and struck her two or three times on the face. One or two of
these blows were violent and took effect on the girl's left eye, producing a contusion and
discolouration. The skull was not fractured, but the blow caused an extravasation of blood in the
brain and the girl died in consequence. The session's judge found the prisoner guilty of murder
and sentenced him to death. The case was sent up for confirmation by the high court. There
being a difference of opinion between the judges as to what offence the prisoner had committed,
the case was referred to the third judge, melville j for his opinion. Justice melville held: for the
convenience of comparison, the provisions, of 11

Culpable homicide section 299 Murder section 300

A person is said to commit culpable homicide, if Subject to the five exceptions, culpable homicide is
the act by which the death is caused is done murder, if the act by which the death is caused is
done
A) with the intention of causing death; A) with the intention of causing death;
B) with the intention of causing such bodily B) with the intention of causing such bodily injury
injury as is likely to cause death; as the offender knows to be likely to cause death of
that particular person;
C) with the knowledge that the act is likely to C) with the intention of causing bodily injury to any
cause death. person, such injury being sufficient in the ordinary
course of nature to cause death;

Section 350 criminal force

Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person's consent, in order to the
committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be

10
K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)
2009 AIR SC 768
11
K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)
1955 cr ilj 905
 12

likely that by the use of such force he will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom
the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other.

Essential ingredients following are the essential ingredients of sec 350 of the indian penal code:

1. Intentional use of force to any person

2. Such force should have been used without the consent of the victim

3. Such force must have been used to commit an offence or with the intention to cause injury,
fear or annoyance to the person to whom it is used.

General comment-

To designate a force as ‘criminal’ it must be used intentionally against a aperson, without

person’s consent , to commit an offence or with an intention to causing or likely to cause injury,
fear, or annoyance to the person to whom it was caused.

The nature and the extent of the offence will depend upon the offender’s intention, or knowledge
or likelyhood of causing injury, fear, or annoyance. 12criminal force must be directed against a
person and not against a thing.13breaking open a lock is not a criminal force 14. The harm can be
cause either directly and indirectly, but it should harm to the person only.

Section 354 assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her
modesty
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be
likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall not be less than one year but which may
extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Meaning of modesty modesty is the quality of being modest which means, as regards women,
decent in manner and conduct, scrupulously chaste, shrinking from indecency, avoidance of
obscene propriety of behaviour, what is required by good taste or delicacy, avoidance of obscene
language and gesture and of undue exposure of person, and respectability. Decorum means
propriety of speech, manner, etc., and dignity15

Essential ingredients

12
K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)
, 2015, SC 0035, Manu
13
Kalar Din v. Emperor,[1941] 42 CrLj 272
1956 (0) klt 92 sc
14
Mangiram v. Emperor,[1972] 28 CrLj 964
15
K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)
 13

1. A woman was assaulted or criminal force was used against her;

2. The accused intended to outrage her modesty or knew that her modesty was likely to be
outraged.

In ram das v state of west bengal 16the supreme court held that it is essential to establish that the
accused acted with the intention to outrage the modesty of the woman or with the knowledge that
it was likely that he would thereby outrage her modesty. The court ruled that no person, in the
absence of any clear and unimpeachable evidence as his intention to outrage modesty of a
woman or as to his knowledge that his conduct he was likely to outrage modesty, can be
convicted under section 354 of the ipc.

In s.p malik v state of orissa 17high court also ruled that merely putting hand on the belly of a
female in public by itself does not amount to an act of outraging modesty of the woman within
the meaning of section 354 of the ipc.

Section 375: Rape

A man is said to commit “rape” if he

1. Penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or
makes her to do so with him or any other person; or

2. Inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the
urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or

3. Manipulates any part of the body of a woman so as to cause penetration into the vagina,
urethra, anus or any of body of such woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person;
or

4. Applies his mouth to the vagina, anus, urethra of a woman or makes her to do so with him or
any other person, under the circumstances falling under any of the following seven descriptions:
—

First.—against her will. Secondly.—without her consent. Thirdly.—with her consent, when her
consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested, in fear of
death or of hurt. Fourthly.—with her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband
and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or
believes herself to be lawfully married. Fifthly.—with her consent when, at the time of giving
such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him
personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to
understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.

16
[1954] AIR, SC 711
17
[1982] Cr Lj 19Ori
 14

Rape: meaning and extent

The word ‘rape’ is derived from the latin term rapio means ‘to seize’. Thus, rape literally means
a forcible seizure. It signifies in common terminology, “as the ravishment of a woman without
her consent and against her will, by force, fear, or fraud” or “the carnal knowledge of a woman
by force against her will”. In other words, rape is violation with violence of the private person of
a woman, an outrage by all means.18

In state of uttar pradesh v chholey lal19 the supreme court held that the expression “against her
will” and “without her consent” may overlap sometimes but surely the two expressions in clause
first and clause second have different connotation and dimension. The expression “against her
will” would ordinarily mean that the intercourse was done by a man with a woman despite her
resistance and opposition. On the other hand, the expression “without her consent” would
comprehend an act of reason accompanied by deliberation.

Section 498a husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to
cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and
shall also be liable to fine.

‘cruelty’ includes both physical and mental torture. ‘wilful conduct’ in explanation (a) to section
498a of the ipc can be inferred from direct and indirect evidence. The word cruelty in the
explanation clause attached to the section has been given a wider meaning to include20:

A) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the women to commit
suicide, or to cause a grave injury or danger to life, limb or mental or physical health of the
woman, or

B) harassment of the woman with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet
any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or on account of failure by her or any
person related to her to meet such demands.

In Arun vyas v Anita vyas 21the supreme court held that cruelty is a continuing offence and hence
every act of cruelty would be a new starting point of limitation under section 472 of the crpc.
However, in cases of cruelty falling under section 498a, the courts, according to the supreme
court, should take cognisance of the offence even after the limitation period if the facts so
warrant by placing reliance on section 473 of the crpc, which provides that court may take
cognisance of an offence even beyond the limitation period in the interest of justice. The apex
court held that women are oppressed and interest of justice demand that court should protect the
oppressed and punish the oppressor. It also observed that courts should construe liberally the
18
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/culpable-homicide-582-1.html
19
[2011] 2 SCC 550, AIR 2011 SC 697
20
KD Gaur, The Indian Penal Code, Fourth Edition(2010),
21
1999 AIR SC 2071
 15

provisions of section 437, crpc, in favour of a wife who is subjected to cruelty.

CONCLUSION
Crimes are committed in all parts of the world and there is no single crime-free country.
Countries still have to work to put a complete stop to violence against human bodies as human b
eings have feelings and in the course of their lives different emotions like vengeance, envy, pride 
are expected to grow up and because of all this they commit crime. 
 16

He should not be prosecuted after a person commits a crime, but we as a society should believe i
n reformist approach rather than punitive approach; we must understand the nature of the person, 
the reason he has become delinquent and the other reasons connected with it to understand why t
he person has committed a crime.Once the reasons are known, steps should be taken to change th
e individual and make him a better citizen to conform to the standards of the people in society.Th
ey are all familiar with stringent laws such as death penalty and life imprisonment for murder, ra
pe and the like; given these rules, there are people committing crime, which means laws have fail
ed to stop people from committing crime if they are provided with proper reformation atleast out
of 10- 5 can be helpful to society in some way and this is the biggest achievement of us as a
society.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Statute-

The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Books-
 17

K.D Gour, Indian Penal Code, (6th Edn, Lexis Nexis, 2018)

Websites-

https://www.cukashmir.ac.in/departmentdocs_23/PDF%20Law%20of%20Crimes%20-%20II.pdf

https://indianlegalsolution.com/offences-against-human-body/