Comparative Study Of Pakistan Penal Code With Indian Penal Code
📜 Introduction: Origins and Structure
Both IPC (1860) and PPC (1860, adapted in 1862) were originally drafted by the British during colonial rule.
After India’s independence and Pakistan’s creation in 1947, the PPC continued in Pakistan, while India continued with the IPC.
Both are comprehensive criminal codes, covering substantive offenses and punishments.
The IPC applies in India and several former British colonies; PPC applies in Pakistan and Azad Jammu & Kashmir.
⚖️ Structural Comparison
| Feature | Indian Penal Code (IPC) | Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) |
|---|---|---|
| Year of Enactment | 1860 (came into force in 1862) | Adapted in 1862 from IPC |
| Number of Sections | 511 sections (as amended) | Around 511 sections |
| Language | English (original), multiple local languages | Urdu (original), also English |
| Codification Style | Detailed, divided into chapters | Similar structure, but with some local amendments |
| Influence | Indian judiciary and legal scholars | Pakistani judiciary, Sharia influence |
📌 Key Areas of Comparison and Case Laws
1. Definition of Murder (Section 300 IPC vs. Section 302 PPC)
Both IPC and PPC define murder with similar elements: intention, knowledge, and causing death.
Indian Case: Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (1958)
The Supreme Court clarified that intention or knowledge to cause death is the essence of murder under IPC Section 300.
Held that murder requires either direct intention or knowledge of fatal consequences.
Pakistani Case: Muhammad Shafi v. The State (PLD 1986 SC 717)
The Supreme Court of Pakistan interpreted Section 302 PPC similarly.
Stressed that intention and knowledge must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Comparative Insight:
Both jurisdictions place a heavy emphasis on mens rea (mental element) in murder cases.
Indian courts often emphasize degree of intention, while Pakistani courts have incorporated Islamic principles (Qisas and Diyat) in punishment.
2. Blasphemy Laws (Section 295A IPC vs. Sections 295-298 PPC)
IPC Section 295A punishes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
PPC has more expansive blasphemy laws, including Section 295-C, which prescribes death penalty for derogatory remarks against Prophet Muhammad.
Pakistani Landmark Case: Asia Bibi Case (Noreen v. Federation of Pakistan, 2018)
Asia Bibi was sentenced to death under Section 295-C PPC for alleged blasphemy.
Supreme Court acquitted her citing lack of evidence and violation of due process.
Indian Context:
IPC 295A is rarely invoked for capital punishment and aims at protecting communal harmony.
Comparative Insight:
The PPC’s blasphemy laws are far more stringent, with harsher punishments.
India’s IPC approach balances freedom of speech and protection of religious sentiments.
3. Hurt and Grievous Hurt (Sections 319-320 IPC vs. Sections 319-320 PPC)
Both codes define hurt and grievous hurt similarly.
Grievous hurt includes serious injuries like emasculation, permanent disfigurement, or danger to life.
Indian Case: State of Maharashtra v. Praful B. Desai (1996)
Supreme Court clarified medical evidence is crucial to prove grievous hurt.
Severity and permanency of injury are key.
Pakistani Case: Ghulam Abbas v. State (PLD 1988 SC 537)
Court emphasized importance of medical testimony and corroborative evidence to convict for grievous hurt.
Comparative Insight:
Both codes align on medical evidence and severity for injury classification.
Procedural handling is similar with some local judicial nuances.
4. Adultery (Section 497 IPC vs. PPC)
Adultery was a criminal offense in IPC Section 497, but was struck down by the Indian Supreme Court in 2018 (Joseph Shine v. Union of India) as unconstitutional.
PPC still criminalizes adultery under Section 497 (punishable under Zina Ordinance, influenced by Islamic law).
Pakistani Context:
Adultery is part of the Hudood Ordinance with strict punishments including flogging and imprisonment.
Cases often tried under Islamic criminal jurisprudence.
Comparative Insight:
India has decriminalized adultery, reflecting gender equality and constitutional morality.
Pakistan continues to criminalize adultery, integrating religious law into the penal code.
5. Death Penalty (Section 302 IPC vs. PPC Death Sentence Provisions)
Both codes provide capital punishment for certain offenses like murder, terrorism, and blasphemy.
Indian judiciary restricts death penalty to rarest of rare cases (Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab).
Pakistani law allows death penalty for wider range of crimes including blasphemy.
Indian Case: Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)
Death penalty limited to exceptional cases.
Pakistani Case: Governor of Punjab v. Saeed Ahmed (PLD 1986 SC 299)
Affirmed death penalty under blasphemy and Qisas laws.
Comparative Insight:
India’s approach is cautious with capital punishment.
Pakistan’s penal code is more permissive with the death penalty, especially for religious offenses.
6. Cyber Crime and Modern Amendments
India amended the IPC with IT Act, 2000 to address cybercrime.
Pakistan introduced Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016.
Indian Case: Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of IT Act for being vague and restricting freedom of speech.
Pakistani Case:
Courts have used PECA to prosecute online offenses but criticized for broad provisions.
📋 Summary Table of Key Differences
| Feature | Indian Penal Code | Pakistan Penal Code |
|---|---|---|
| Origin | British India 1860 | Adapted from IPC in 1862 |
| Religious Offenses | Limited (e.g., 295A) | Extensive blasphemy and Hudood laws |
| Adultery | Decriminalized (2018) | Criminalized under Hudood Ordinance |
| Death Penalty Application | Limited; rarest of rare doctrine | Broader application, including blasphemy |
| Integration of Islamic Law | Minimal | Significant (Hudood Ordinance, Qisas) |
| Cyber Laws | IT Act, 2000; progressive judicial outlook | PECA, 2016; broader, sometimes controversial |
⚖️ Conclusion
IPC and PPC share a common origin but have diverged considerably.
Indian Penal Code follows a more secular, progressive approach, balancing rights and law enforcement.
Pakistan Penal Code is heavily influenced by Islamic law, especially in personal law and religious offenses.
Both have developed unique case law reflecting their social, cultural, and constitutional frameworks.
RELATED Blog
0 comments