The Significance Of Mens Rea In Determining Criminal Liability

Shaheb Sonkar, National Law University Odisha (Cuttack)

Divya Singh, National Law University Odisha (Cuttack)

INTRODUCTION

In Law, Mens rea is a term which in general relates to the actual guilty state of Mind; and in such an unfortunate situation, there would be no crime on any given occasion due to the lack of it. It is among the most crucial elements of criminal liability. Just in case where an act that the law prohibits is done intentionally. It is seen as a criminal offense. Mens rea is the intent that constitutes the driving force behind the illegal conduct.The only way an act becomes criminal is if it is performed out of guilty mind. In most cases, if the mind of the actor is innocent, no crime has been committed. 1An individual must be in a mental state deserving of blame before he or she can be held criminally liable. For example, it is not a crime to inflict injury on a person who is found attacking one in self-defence; however, the act of inflicting injury in efforts to punish or recompense is not allowed by law.

This familiar Latin maxim expresses the essential concept of ‘the principle of mens rea: 'actus non facitreum nisi mens sit rea’— A person is not guilty of an act unless they are also guilty of the thought. The brutal crime is a paradigm case; at least for the graver crimes, mere criminal act- commission—or resulting in the state of affairs that the legislation forbids—is not sufficient to commit an offence. Most of the instances, There must also be some other sort of misbehaviour or improper intent.2

Evolution of Mens rea

In the 12th century, Crime had nothing to do with Mens Rea. Wrongdoers were punished irrespective of whether their actions were intentional or not.The 17th century saw the introduction of the Latin proverb "actusreus non facitreum nisi mens sit rea," which translates to "there can be no crime without a guilty mind".3The issue that a crime can only be described as an action taken with the intent to commit a crime was fixed by this maxim. It was later adopted from English law during the reign of British rule and put into Indian criminal laws as part of Mens Rea. Lord Macaulay, in 1860, came up with a draft of the ‘Indian Penal Code’ which was put to action on ‘October 6, 1860’. Mens Rea was originally included in English law, but it was added after modifications and appropriate sequencing to account for the circumstances in British India.

OBJECTIVES:

1. To understand the influence of mens rea in criminal liability

2. To understand the relationship between mens rea and actus reus in establishing criminal liability.

CONCEPTUALISATION

The concept of mens rea in Indian criminal law is the application of mens rea is widespread in Indian criminal law. The explanations behind this are obvious. One of the main causes is that India has a codified criminal code with accurate definitions for every offence. If mens rea is considered a prerequisite, it is then included in the definition of the crime and handled as one of its elements. The penal law has numerous definitions that require the commission of a crime to be done "voluntarily," "dishonestly," "knowingly," "fraudulently," and so on. Accordingly, the guilty mind is one that is deceitful, dishonest, or careless. Furthermore, mens rea or purpose are not taken into consideration while defining several offences under the Indian penal code, such as crimes against the state and counterfeiting currency. Mens rea is so important to the functioning of penal responsibility in India that it is enshrined in the General Exceptions (Sections 76 to 106) of the penal code. These sections list all the circumstances under which mens rea seems to have been subordinated and, hence, there is no criminal liability.

TYPES OF MENS REA

Under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Mens Rea is categorized into four primary forms according to the various mental states and dispositions that create criminal liability. Those are: Firstly, Intention: It is the most grave form of ‘Mens Rea’. A person acts with an intention when he harbours a particular motive to cause a specific consequence. For example, if someone plans and commits a murder, the person's intention to kill is clear, and therefore his crime comes within the definition of murder under Section 300 of the BNS. Intention, it involves a conscious decision on the part of an individual to cause or bring about a particular consequence or result by performing a specific act. 4Second is Knowledge: This is when the individual knows that their acts are likely to cause a particular dangerous consequence. An example is if an individual knows selling an unsafe product would likely endanger others. In such a scenario, the individual has the place a person at fault, especially in those offenses where causing harm is their probable result. Thirdly, Recklessness: A known risk is ignored with a conscious awareness of that risk. A person is liable to act recklessly when it is appreciated that his or her conduct is likely to injure, yet the person acts anyway. As an example, reckless driving is driving through traffic without any regard for safety at all. Under the BNS, such recklessness may bring liability with harm resulting from such disregard. And Fourth is Negligence: This is a type that entails failure to provide care level that could be ascribed to a reasonable person under like conditions. Negligence refers to a lowered standard of Mens Rea, applicable in the matter that relates to causing unintended harm by the omission to take that degree of care that could reasonably be expected, including bringing about the occurrence of a traffic accident for not observing the correct safety procedure. The BNS acknowledges negligence as a potential basis of liability for death or injury.