Difference between Culpable Homicide and Murder

Two brothers, Ramesh and Suresh, have had a long-standing dispute over a piece of land. One day, the argument escalates beyond words. Ramesh, in a fit of uncontrollable rage, picks up a heavy iron rod and hits Suresh on the head. Suresh collapses, bleeding profusely. He is rushed to the hospital, but it's too late. He dies on the way. This raises a key question: Did Ramesh commit murder?

This is where it gets confusing, as the death of a person is caused by another. However, in the eyes of the law, it is not Murder; it is Culpable Homicide (Not Amounting to Murder).

And this brings us to another question: What is the difference between Murder and Culpable Homicide under Indian law? The answer lies in the intent and knowledge behind the act. Let’s break it down.

The Historical Roots

The concepts of Murder and Culpable Homicide have been present in legal systems for centuries. Ancient Indian texts, including the Manusmriti and Arthashastra, distinguished between intentional killings and accidental deaths. In modern times, the British introduced a structured penal code in India, codifying these offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 (now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023).

Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, a key figure in drafting the IPC, explained that murder and Culpable Homicide are like two concentric circles—murder is the narrower, more serious offence, while Culpable Homicide is the wider circle encompassing all unlawful killings.

First let’s go into some flashbacks and understand…

What is a Homicide?

The term Homicide is derived from the Latin words homo (human) and caedere (to kill).

It refers to the act of one person killing another. But here is the catch—Not all homicides are crimes, it is a broad category which includes both lawful and unlawful killings.

So, while killing in self-defense may be justified and lawful, but when a homicide is unlawful it is further categorized into Culpable Homicide which has two major heads:

1. Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder (Section 100 BNS)
2. Culpable Homicide Amounting to Murder (i.e. Murder) (Section 101 BNS)

Culpable Homicide = genus, and Murder = species.

So, all Murders are Culpable Homicides, but not all Culpable Homicides are Murders.

Refer to the following infographic, to paint a clear picture in your head and to help you understand the flow chart of ‘Homicide’.

Before getting into technical definitions of the crimes, understanding Intent and Knowledge is the key! As the law draws a distinction between Culpable Homicide and Murder based on intent, knowledge, and circumstances surrounding the killing.

Intent vs. Knowledge

• Intent: It is about what the person wants to do. It reflects a desire or purpose.

• Knowledge: It is about what the person knows is likely to happen, even if he doesn't desire it.

For example,

• If Ramesh picked up the rod with the clear intention to kill Suresh, that shows intention, and
• If Ramesh hit Suresh hard in the head, and knew it could cause death but didn't specifically want him dead, that is knowledge.

The presence or absence of these mental elements in an act is very crucial to determine whether the act is Culpable Homicide or Murder.

What is Culpable Homicide?

(Culpable Homicide NOT Amounting to Murder)

Section 100 BNS (Section 299 IPC) states:

"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.”

Essential Elements of Culpable Homicide:

1. Causing death: The primary element of culpable homicide is the actual cause of death.

2. Intention or knowledge: The act must have been performed with intent to cause death or knowledge that it is likely to cause death. The degree of intention determines whether the act amounts to murder or just culpable homicide.

3. Voluntary act: The act must be voluntary, i.e., not done under compulsion or duress.

Simply put, If someone kills a person and they either intended to kill or knew their act could kill someone, it is called Culpable Homicide. It does not always amount to murder but is still a serious crime.

For example,

• If Ramesh hits Suresh knowing it could kill him, even without the specific intention to cause death, he could be guilty of culpable homicide.
• If Ramesh intended to hurt but not necessarily kill, yet knew that his action could likely result in death, it still falls under culpable homicide.

📌 Punishment for Culpable Homicide:

It varies based on the severity of the act and is covered under Section 105, BNS (Section 304 IPC).

- Part I: If the act is done with intention – Life imprisonment OR 5 to 10 years + fine

- Part II: If the act is done with knowledge but without intention – Up to 10 years + fine

So, when does Culpable Homicide qualify as Murder?

Culpable Homicide becomes murder when the act is done with the intention to cause death or with knowledge that it is likely to cause death.

To make this clearer, let’s take some examples:

Example 1: Murder

Ramesh waits behind a wall with the rod, knowing Suresh takes the same path daily. He attacks him with a blow to the head with full force. This is intended murder!

Example 2: Culpable Homicide (Not Murder)

If Ramesh was swinging the rod to scare off a stray dog and accidentally hit Suresh, causing death, it might not even qualify as culpable homicide — possibly a case of death by negligence or no criminal offense at all. This is culpable homicide, not amounting to murder!

What is Murder?

(Culpable Homicide Amounting to Murder)

Section 101 BNS (Section 300 IPC) states:

“Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder,–

(a) if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death; or

(b) if the act by which the death is caused 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

(c) if the act by which the death is caused 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

(d) if the person committing the act by which the death is caused, 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, andcommitssuchactwithoutanyexcuseforincurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.”

Murder is a more serious subset of Culpable Homicide, the section lists out when it qualifies as murder:

1. Intention to cause death.
2. Intention to cause bodily injury that is likely to cause death.
3. Bodily injury sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
4. The act is imminently dangerous and must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

What is bodily injury?

Bodily injury refers to any harm or damage inflicted on a person's body. It can include:

1. Physical harm such as cuts, bruises, fractures, or burns.
2. Injuries that cause temporary or permanent impairment, such as disfigurement or loss of function in any body part.
3. Damage to internal organs or tissues, even if not visible externally.

In legal terms, bodily injury is often used to describe harm that can result in death or serious harm, and is an essential element in determining the severity of crimes like Culpable Homicide or murder.

Simply put, murder is a type of Culpable Homicide where the intent is clearer and more direct. If a person deliberately shoots someone in the head, it is murder.

So, if Ramesh intentionally caused an injury on Suresh’s head that any reasonable person would know would likely kill him, it could qualify as murder.

Exceptions to Murder (When Murder Becomes Culpable Homicide)

There are certain exceptions to the act of murder where murder is reduced to Culpable Homicide, if the act falls under the following exceptions:

Exception 1: Grave and Sudden Provocation

If a person loses control due to sudden and grave provocation and kills someone, it is not murder but Culpable Homicide.

Key Case: K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962)

In this landmark case, Commander K.M. Nanavati, a naval officer, found his wife Sylvia having an affair with Prem Ahuja. In a fit of rage, Nanavati confronted Ahuja and shot him dead.

The Supreme Court ruled that grave and sudden provocation led Nanavati to kill Ahuja in the heat of the moment. The court held that this act was not murder, but culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the provocation was severe and immediate, causing Nanavati to lose control.

Significance: This case is a key example of how provocation can reduce murder to culpable homicide.

Exception 2: Right to Private Defense

If a person unintentionally causes death while defending themselves beyond reasonable limits, it is Culpable Homicide.

Key Case: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam (2008)

Rajesh Gautam was charged with murder after he killed a person in self-defense during a violent attack. He claimed that he acted to defend himself and his family from imminent danger.

The court ruled that the killing was an excessive use of force in self-defense. Although he was justified in defending himself, the court reduced the charge from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder because the excessive force exceeded the limits of necessary defense.

Significance: This case is an example of how excessive force in self-defense can reduce what would have been a murder charge to culpable homicide.

Exception 3: Act done by a public servant

If a public servant causes death while doing his lawful duty in good faith, it is not murder.

Key Case: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narmada Prasad (1996)

A police officer shot and killed a person during a confrontation while performing his duty, believing that the person was a criminal about to attack others.

The court ruled that the police officer acted in good faith within the scope of his duty, and therefore the killing was not murder. The act was done by a public servant under the lawful exercise of his powers, and thus, it was not considered murder but a lawful killing.

Significance: This case highlights that an act done by a public servant in good faith during the execution of his duty cannot be classified as murder.

Exception 4: Sudden fight

If two people fight suddenly, and one kills the other without prior intention, it is Culpable Homicide.

Key Case: Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (1958)

In this case, the accused killed the victim during a sudden fight in a field. The fight was not premeditated, and the killing occurred in a moment of anger.

The court held that the killing did not amount to murder because it occurred during a sudden fight, and the victim’s death was not the result of premeditation. The court reduced the charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Significance: This case is an example of how a sudden fight without prior intention can reduce a murder charge to culpable homicide.

Exception 5: Consent of the person who dies

If a person above 18 years consents to an act that leads to their death, it is Culpable Homicide.

Key Case: P. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994)

In this case, a woman requested euthanasia due to extreme physical suffering, and the doctor complied. The deceased had consented to the act.

The Supreme Court held that consent of the deceased in cases of euthanasia (if the person is above 18) could be a defense. The court ruled that in the absence of malicious intent, the act could be classified as culpable homicide, but not murder.

Significance: This case demonstrated how consent of the deceased can mitigate the charge of murder, reducing it to culpable homicide.

📌 Punishment for murder

It is provided under Section 125, BNS (Section 302 IPC): Death penalty or life imprisonment + fine

To conclude, Differences & Similarities between Culpable Homicide & Murder—

You can also watch the video to understand in further detail.

Conclusion

The difference between culpable homicide and murder lies in the intention, knowledge, and situation surrounding the act. The law acknowledges the complexities of human behavior and doesn’t paint all killings with the same brush.

Through our consistent example of Ramesh and Suresh, we see how the same act can lead to very different legal outcomes, based on subtle variations in the facts and mindset.

So, next time you hear about a violent crime, try to pause and think — not just about what happened, but why and how it happened. That, in the eyes of law, makes all the difference.