Difference between Culpable Homicide and Murder.

Section 299 defines Culpable Homicide.

Whoever causes death by doing an act with,

1. Intention of causing death.
2. Intentionally causing bodily injury which is likely to cause death.
3. Doing act with knowledge that it is likely to cause death.

Section 300 defines Murder.

Whoever causes death by doing an act with.

1. Intention  of causing death.
2.  Causing such bodily injury as the offender knows it is likely to cause death of person.
3. Intentionally causing bodily injury which is sufficient to cause death.
4. Doing act with knowledge that it is  so imminently dangerous and in all probability causes death.

The question is when death of man is to be treated as culpable homicide or murder. there is thin difference between the murder and culpable homicide.why this difference is important because the culpable homicide carries maximum punishment of life imprisonment and  where as murder carries death sustenance. 2 and 3 Ingrident of 299 and 3 and 4 of 300 difference is on apparent. read the marked words the difference would be noticed. if the death of the person is more than survival then it is murder. On the other hand death is likely, means survival and death are in the same proportionate, then it is culpable homicide. it depends upon what kind of weapon offender has used and where the injuries are caused.suppose the offender has used the sharp weapon and struck on the vital part of body, naturally the injury is sufficent to cause the death and offender has the knowledge that his act is imminent danger and in all probable death is  bound to occur. This kind of death is called Murder. On the other hand, where the blunt and hard weapon like stick and stone are used and injuries are caused on the hard part of the body. In such cases the death is likely rather than probable, therefore it is culpable homicide and not murder.

The most  confusing aspect is 1st ingredient of both definition because in both definition  there is intention cause death. In both culpable homicide and murder the death is always caused intentionally, then how you can make the difference. Here you have to consider the degree of intention of the offenders. if person is killed in cold blooded manner or with well  planed then it is murder because the intention to kill is in high degree. On the other hand the person is killed without pre planed, in sudden fight or in sudden anger because of some ones provocation or instigation, then such death is called the culpable homicide. whether it is murder or culpable homicide is question of fact depends upon the degree of intention, what kind of weapons are used and where the injures are struck.

Exception 1-5 to 300 section says killing of human being is considered as culpable homicide does not amounts murder. There are three three headings which deals with death of human being.

1. Culpable Homicide. section-299.
2. Murder-Section 300.
3. Culpable Homicide does not amount murder-Exceptions 1-5 to 300.

The drafter of IPC have created the confusion by defining culpable homicide under 299 and creating  five exceptions to murder and calling it as culpable homicide does not amounts murder. Both deals with the same matter, it would have been better if section 299 is omitted.   

Man fights dead son.s divorce case. reported in indiatimes.com.

80 years old father authorised by the Bomabay High Court to pursue the divorce procedings intiatied by the son after his death is important development in the law.

Right to seek either criminal or civil justice is important right of every human being. Rights are enjoyed  by the person after his berth and before the death. It means rights cannot be enforced against or in-favor of dead man.

Criminal justice is based on the principle of "Actio personalis moritur cum persona." means man can not punished in his graveyard. The object of Criminal justice is to punish the wrong doer, so his death terminates the proceedings of criminal trial because dead man can not imprisoned or punished. Now days punishments may in the form of fine also. In such case the trial may be continued because the fine would be recoverable  from his estate. This is okay when the trial is over, fine has been imposed thereafter the criminal is dead. supposes the criminal dies during the trial the question would it be continued even it is punishable by fine.Another principle of criminal proceeding is that trial should be held in the presence accused and he should be given chance defend himself. on this logic the criminal trial would not be continued after death of the under-trial.

The matter is different in case of the civil proceedings. Object of civil justice is to claim the damages which can be achieved inspite of death of the party because the awarded damages would be recovered from the property of the dead man which is now in the hands of heirs. Civil suits may be related to property rights or personal rights.Death makes difference in case of civil suits related to personal rights. for example A has filled the suit for enforcement of conjugal rights against his wife, if wife dies during the  proceeding, then proceedings would  not be continued because the conjugal rights can not be enforced agains the dead wife.

In this reported  case also son has filled the divorce procedings against his wife during his life time. Now the death of the son naturally the terminates the proceedings of the divorce because it is based on the personal rights of the parties.when the person who wanted to seek the divorce from the wife is no more alive then no one else can claim it on his behalf because it his personal right.Nevertheless is this theory or principle is fair or unfair.when the man has filled divorce petition against his wife then he has made his intention clear that woman should be continued as his wife. during the suit proceedings if the petitioner dies, why the proceedings would not be continued. what is harm in contuning the case. The man who wanted to get rid of from his wife would be continued as legal wife for ever. Moreover she would inherit his property as class one heir excluding others, against whom he fought for entire life and spend all his resources for that legal battle. Mere death frustrate all these things and his foe becomes most preferred legal heir, What humiliation or insult to that dead man? Don't u think the proceedings of that man should be continued by the legal heirs? Bombay High Court has done right thing by allowing his father to continue the divorce proceeding insituted by the deceased son. I think judgment is highly appreciable.

Natural law.

1. natural law lies in ethics, religious, supernatural.
2. Moral justification for existing social and legal system.
3. Different concept, Doctrine and meaning at different time.
4. Universal, eternal law, unwritten law.
5. principles of morality and justice.