SECTION 302 IPC - Indian Penal Code - Punishment for murder

Punishment for Murder- Section 302

We often get to hear that the Court has found someone guilty of committing a crime of murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In cases like these, the Court penalizes the murderer either with death penalty or life imprisonment. However, a huge number of Indian population is yet unaware of what section 302 of IPC deals with. Here’s a glimpse of what section 302 is all about:

What is Section 302 of IPC?

The Indian Penal Code was brought into force in the year 1862 during the British rule in India. Thereafter, with regard to the need of the society, amendments were made to the IPC time to time. The most important changes under the Indian Penal Code were particularly made after the Indian Independence. The importance of IPC was to such an extent that Pakistan and Bangladesh also adopted it for the purposes of criminal governance.

Similarly, taking reference from the basic structure of the Indian Penal Code, penal law in countries then under British rule such as Myanmar, Burma, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, etc. was also implemented.

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is important in many ways. Individuals accused of committing murder are prosecuted under this section only. Furthermore, if in case an accused of murder has been proven guilty of the crime, section 302 prescribes the punishment for such offenders. It states that whoever has committed murder shall be punished either with imprisonment for life or the death penalty (depending upon the severity of the murder) along with a fine. The primary point of consideration for the Court, in matters related to murder, is intention and motive of the accused. This is why it is important that the motive and intention of the accused is proved in cases under to this section.

What are the essential ingredients of murder?

The essential ingredients of murder include:

• Intention: There should be an intention of causing death

• Causing Death: The act must be done with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause the death of another.

• Bodily Injury: There should be an intention to cause such bodily injury that is likely to cause death.

Illustrations:

• A shoots B with an intention of killing him. As a result, B dies, murder is committed by A.

• D intentionally gives a sword-cut to C that is sufficient to cause death of anyone in the ordinary course of nature. As a consequence, C dies. Here, D is guilty of murder though he did not intend to cause C's death.

Scope of Section 302

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code provides the punishment for murder. According to this Section whoever commits murder is punished with:

• Death;

• Life imprisonment;

• The convict shall also be liable to fine.

The punishment under Section 302 of the IPC has been elaborated below for your kind perusal:

Death Penalty

Capital punishment or the death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a heinous crime. Death penalty in India is given for the rarest of rare cases. The criteria for a crime being “rarest of rare case” has not been defined. At least 100 people in 2007, 40 in 2006, 77 in 2005, 23 in 2002, and 33 in 2001 were sentenced to death (but not executed), according to Amnesty International statistics.

The Supreme Court in Mithu vs. State of Punjab struck down Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which provided for a mandatory death sentence for offenders serving a life sentence. In December 2007, India voted against a United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty. In November 2012, India again upheld its stance on capital punishment by voting against the UN General Assembly draft resolution seeking to end the institution of capital punishment globally. On 31 August 2015, the Law Commission of India submitted a report to the government which recommended the abolition of capital punishment for all crimes in India, excepting the crime of waging war against the nation or for terrorism-related offences. The Law Commission report cited several factors to justify abolishing the death penalty, including its abolition by 140 other nations, its arbitrary and flawed application and its lack of any proven deterring effect on criminals. Many countries refuse to handover Indian fugitives because of the presence of capital punishment in India. India opposed a UN resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, as it goes against Indian statutory law and the sovereign right of every country to determine their own legal system. In light of the above discussion, it is essential to elaborate on the below-mentioned two points:

1. Meaning of expression "Beyond Reasonable Doubt"

For a doubt to stand in the way of conviction of guilt it must be a real doubt and a reasonable doubt. If the data leaves the mind of the trial judge in doubt, the decision must be against the party having the burden of persuasion. If the mind of the adjudication tribunal is evenly balanced as to whether or not the accused is guilty, it is its duty to acquit the accused.

2. Examining Rarest of Rare Case in Imposing Death Penalty

Rarest of the rare case is the principle enshrined in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) (2 SCC 684) which limits the vast discretion of the court in imposing death penalty. Death as a highest punishment was removed from being a general rule to being awarded only in exceptional circumstances and that too after recording the special reason for imposing the highest punishment which cannot be reverted under any circumstance after its execution. The phrase "rarest of the rare" case still remains to be defined while the concern for human life, the norms of a civilised society and the need to reform the criminal has engaged the attention of the courts. The sentence of death has to be based on the action of the criminal rather than the crime committed. The doctrine of proportionality of sentence vis-a-vis the crime, the victim and the offender has been the greatest concern of the courts.

Imprisonment for Life

There are three types of imprisonment namely solitary, rigorous and simple imprisonment. The imprisonment for life means the person is imprisoned for his lifetime. Section 53 of the Indian Penal Code provides that there can be certain types of punishments where imprisonment for life is also an accepted form of punishment. The term transportation for life was replaced with the term imprisonment for life in the year 1955. According to Section 302, imprisonment for life is also a punishment for committing murder. The imprisonment for life is not a violent punishment like the death penalty but it still affects the accused and the society.

Fine

A person charged with murder can also be liable to pay a fine along with the sentence as directed by the Court. The quantum of the fine to be paid by the convict would depend upon the discretion of the Court. The Court may take into consideration the manner in which the murder has been committed and after a thorough application of mind would award the right amount of fine to be paid by the accused.

Conviction of a Minor in a Murder Case

The children are the future of every nation, so it has to be carefully evaluated before providing them major punishments like the death penalty and life imprisonment for heinous crimes. The conviction should be based on the principles of law of evidence. Justice Lokur, who is the head of the chairman of the Supreme Court Juvenile Justice Committee, stated that “Every as said that juvenile convicts cannot be handed down capital punishment in every case pertaining to heinous crimes such as rape and murder. He stated that every person who is of around 17 years or close to 18 years cannot be awarded the death penalty just because they committed a heinous crime, a proper conclusion must be achieved after going through all the evidence which are related to the case”.

According to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, the individuals who were under the age of 18 at the time of the crime cannot be executed. The Juvenile Justice Act of 2015 replaced the act that was in 2000. The act which was amended allows the persons of the age group from 16 years to 18 years can be tried as adults if they commit any heinous crimes like rape and murder. The main reason for passing the bill was the Delhi rape case, where one of the accused was 17 years old when committing the offence. He was tried separately by the juvenile court and was awarded only three years of imprisonment. This raised a lot of controversies and mandated there should be an amendment in the age of the juveniles who are committing heinous crimes.

Sentence to Co-accused in a Murder Case

The persons who are accused of the same crime will be awarded the same amount of punishment. The confession of the co-accused is provided under Section 30 in the Indian Evidence Act. The confession made by the co-accused has a proper evidentiary value and it affects himself and also the other accused. The parity principle ensures that a sentence should be similar to the same offenders or persons convicted of the same crime. This principle ensures fairness and equality while awarding the sentences.

Section 302 Not Applicable in Certain Cases

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code dictates certain conditions for an individual to be proven guilty. Only when all the conditions prescribed under the section are met with, an accused is convicted under this section of the code. If in case, a matter registered under this section is not able to fulfill all the conditions prescribed thereunder, then the individual accused cannot be convicted under this section and the said matter will have to be pursued under some other provision of the Indian Penal Code.

As stated above, under section 302 the intention of the accused has to be proved, however, in some matters, a murder must have taken place but the accused may not have the intention to cause the same. In such cases, the matter will be pursued under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 304 deals with some prerequisites of culpable homicide and includes punishment for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It penalizes an accused with imprisonment for life or jail time for 10 years instead of the death penalty along with a fine.

Some of the most popular cases in which section 302 was invoked are the Tandoor murder case, Jessica Lal murder case, Nitish Katara murder case. Similarly, in 2012 under the Brajendra Singh case also section 302 was invoked and the accused was penalized with the death penalty by a Madhya Pradesh Court. In all the above-mentioned cases, the Court validated the allegations and intention of the accused based on the testimonies submitted by the witnesses, and thereafter penalized the accused in accordance with the crimes committed by them.