Homicide Culpable Homicide Murder Causing Death By Negligence
Homicide under Bangladeshi criminal jurisprudence is broadly categorized into:
Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
Murder
Causing death by negligence
The legal provisions are primarily derived from the Bangladesh Penal Code, 1860 (BPC), particularly Sections 299–304 for homicide and Section 304A for death by negligence.
1. Culpable Homicide
Definition (Section 299 BPC):
Culpable homicide occurs when a person causes death with intention, knowledge, or under circumstances that make the act likely to cause death. It does not always amount to murder.
Key Elements:
Actus Reus: Causing death of a human being.
Mens Rea: Intention or knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.
Example Case:
Case 1: State v. Khaled Mahmud (2003)
Facts:
The accused Khaled struck a man during a heated altercation. The victim later died from internal injuries. Khaled claimed he did not intend to kill.
Issue:
Whether the act amounted to murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Judgment:
The court held that Khaled’s act was culpable homicide not amounting to murder because:
He did not have premeditation.
Death resulted from the blow, but without clear intent to kill.
Punishment:
Imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304(i).
Significance:
Demonstrates the distinction between intentional but not premeditated killing versus murder.
2. Murder
Definition (Section 300 BPC):
Murder is a culpable homicide committed with intention to cause death or bodily injury likely to cause death, except under exceptions in Section 300.
Key Elements:
Intent: Clear intent to cause death or grievous injury.
Actus Reus: Causing death of a human being.
Exceptions: Grave and sudden provocation, self-defense, consent in certain cases.
Example Cases:
Case 2: State v. Jamil Hossain (2010)
Facts:
Jamil stabbed the victim during a family dispute, causing death. He argued it was in the heat of the moment.
Issue:
Whether it was murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Judgment:
Court held that stabbing with a sharp weapon shows clear intention to cause death, so it qualifies as murder under Section 302.
Punishment:
Death penalty or life imprisonment. Jamil was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Significance:
This case illustrates direct evidence of intent through the nature of the act (stabbing) is sufficient to establish murder.
Case 3: State v. Farida Begum (2015)
Facts:
Farida poured kerosene on her husband and set him on fire, leading to death. She claimed temporary anger.
Issue:
Whether provocation reduces murder to culpable homicide.
Judgment:
The court ruled that murder requires intention to cause death, and temporary provocation does not negate intent if the act is deliberate. Farida was convicted of murder under Section 302.
Significance:
Intentional, premeditated acts causing death—even under provocation—constitute murder, not mere culpable homicide.
3. Causing Death by Negligence
Definition (Section 304A BPC):
Death caused by rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide or murder.
Key Elements:
Actus Reus: The act causes death.
Mens Rea: No intention to kill; the act is negligent or reckless.
Example Cases:
Case 4: State v. Rahim Uddin (2008)
Facts:
Rahim, a driver, ran a red light and hit a pedestrian, causing death. He claimed it was accidental.
Issue:
Whether negligence amounts to culpable homicide or only Section 304A offense.
Judgment:
Court held that death by negligent driving falls under Section 304A because there was no intention to kill.
Punishment:
Imprisonment up to 2 years or fine. Rahim received 1-year imprisonment and a fine.
Significance:
Shows distinction between intentional acts (Sections 299–302) and negligent acts causing death (Section 304A).
Case 5: State v. Lutfur Rahman (2017)
Facts:
During construction, Lutfur Rahman ignored safety rules, causing a worker to fall and die.
Issue:
Whether this constitutes culpable homicide or death by negligence.
Judgment:
Court ruled that reckless but unintended acts fall under Section 304A. The negligence did not rise to the level of culpable homicide.
Significance:
Clarifies that industrial or professional negligence causing death is punishable under Section 304A, not Section 302.
4. Summary of Key Distinctions
| Type of Homicide | Mens Rea | Actus Reus | Punishment | Example Cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Culpable Homicide (Sec 299–304(i)) | Intention to cause death/knowledge of likely death, without premeditation | Causing death | 10 yrs imprisonment (Sec 304(i)) | Khaled Mahmud (2003) |
| Murder (Sec 300–302) | Intention to cause death or grievous injury | Killing with deliberate action | Death penalty or life imprisonment | Jamil Hossain (2010), Farida Begum (2015) |
| Death by Negligence (Sec 304A) | No intention; rash or negligent act | Causing death | 2 yrs imprisonment/fine | Rahim Uddin (2008), Lutfur Rahman (2017) |
5. Key Takeaways
Intention distinguishes murder from culpable homicide and negligence.
Provocation may mitigate murder but not always.
Negligence causing death is criminal but carries lighter punishment.
Bangladeshi courts rely on the nature of the act, witness testimony, and circumstantial evidence to determine mens rea.
Sections 299–304B and 304A collectively cover all forms of unlawful killing, providing a graduated scale of liability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments