Elements

of Crime
 The Elements of a Crime
Human being : Man is under obligation to act in a particular way.

Mens rea or guilty intention:

Person has the guilty intention and he acts in furtherance thereof;
Words like dishonestly, voluntarily, knowingly; Acts prohibited in public interest, public
nuisance etc

Actus reus or illegal act or omission: Represents the acts of a person

Injury to another: Act that has caused injury to another person or society.
 Elements of Crime
Wrongful act combined with wrongful intention leads to crime
There are four elements that constitute a crime:
◦ Human being under a legal obligation to act in a particular way and a fit subject for
the infliction of appropriate punishment
◦ Evil intent or mens rea on the part of the human being
◦ Actus reus- act committed or omitted in furtherance of such an intent
◦ An injury to another human being or to the society at large by such an act
1. Human being: The first and foremost element of crime is that the injury must be
caused by a human being. Only a human can be made legally bound to act in a judicially
appropriate way as laws are only applicable to human. Under Sec. 11 of Indian Penal
Code the word person include artificial or judicial person hence they are punishable as
well. Animals used to be punished in ancient times now their owners are made liable.
‘Person’ is defined in Section 11 of Indian Penal Code which includes company,
association or body of persons whether incorporated or not.
2. Mens Rea: Mens Rea is the most important element to prove a crime has taken place.
It means it was the intention of the wrongdoer to purposely / knowingly/ willingly and
with proper planning to cause harm to a person, animal or property. The basic
requirement of the principle mens rea is that the accused must have been aware of those
elements in his act which make the crime with which he is charged.
3. Actus reus: It is the guilty Act that follows the guilty intention. An act will only be
called a crime if both the elements are present. The guilty intention of person leads them
to act in accordance to it and hence it turns into crime. In other words, it means some overt
act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of the guilty intention.

4. Injury: for a particular crime to take place it is necessary for the injury to occur. After
having guilty mind and doing the guilty act if the injury does not occur then that crime is
not considered as committed.
The injury should be illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property. As
according to Section 44 of IPC, 1860 the injury denotes any harm illegally caused to any person in
body, mind, reputation or property by another person.
 Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea

Any act to be illegal in nature it must be done with a guilty mind. Thus to convict
the defendant, it must be proved that the criminal act was carried out with a
criminal intend. Not only is the act of the accused important but the intention of
the accused to do the specific act is equally important to prove the guilt of the
accused. Thus it can be concluded that mere commission of a criminal act or
breach of law is not sufficient to constitute a crime.
Actus Reus
The word actus denotes a deed. A physical result of human conduct
Reus means forbidden by law
Actus reus is made up of three components:
◦ Human Action – Conduct
◦ Result of conduct
◦ Act prohibited by law

Act must be voluntary.

Actus reus is Latin for “guilty act.”
A person must be found to have done the illegal act before she or he can be
convicted of the crime.
The guilty act can be something a person does or something a person omits to do,
i.e. something a person is required to do but fails to do.
Mens Rea
It is a blameworthy mental condition

There must be a mind at fault to constitute a crime

The act becomes criminal when the actor does it with a guilty mind

Mens rea” is a state of mind.

Under the criminal law, mens rea is considered as the “guilty intention” and unless it is
found that the “ Accused ” had the guilty intention to commit the “crime” he cannot be
held “guilty” of committing the crime
Mental element in crime.
Intention mens rea means a mental state, in which a person deliberately violates a
law.
Thus mens rea means intention to do the prohibited act. No act per se (itself) is
criminal, the act becomes a crime only when it is done with a guilt mind.
It signifies the mental element necessary to convict for any crime.

Mens rea may be either

◦ Intention to do the immediate act or bring about consequences
◦ Knowledge
◦ Recklessness / negligence as to such act or consequences
Mens rea is a state of mind. It is considered as the guilty intention and until there is a
guilty intent to commit the crime a person cannot be held guilty of committing the
crime. – Directorate of Enforcement v. MCTM Corporation

Mens rea is an essential ingredient of a criminal offence and the mere

fact that the objective of the statute is to promise welfare activities or to
eradicate a grave social evil is by itself and not decisive of the question
whether the element of guilty mind is excluded from the ingredients of
an offence. Mens rea may be excluded from a statute only where it is
absolutely clear that the implementation of the object of the statute
would otherwise be defeated. – Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
 Intentionally – Sec 37
Intention means a purpose or desire to bring about a contemplated result or foresight that
certain circumstances will follow from the conduct of the person.
Motive is the reason or ground of an action, whereas intention is the volition or active
desire to do an act.
Intention is an operation of the will directing an overt act , while motive is the feeling
that prompts the operation of the will the ulterior object of the person willing.
An intention to commit an offence may be inferred from knowledge, though, at times,
intention and knowledge is the awareness of the consequences of an act.
It is the state of mind of the person doing the crime. It can be proved when the
defendant can foresee virtually that the consequences of the action of the person
is going to kill, cause grievous injury or any other prohibited harm to them
Knowledge or knowingly – Sec 35
The knowledge form of a guilty mind means that the accused must have knowledge of the
specific circumstances of the crime.
There may be knowledge of the likely consequences without any intention to cause the
consequences.
Personal information about consequence of his act. It is a state of mental realisation, conscious
awareness of facts.

Firstly, if a person had knowledge and act in a wrongful manner and secondly, they
had knowledge about the bad consequences and chose not to act hence resulting in
a wrongful act.
 Recklessness
State of mind of a person who foresees the possible consequences of his conduct, but
acts without any intention or desire to bring them about.
A man is said to be reckless with respect to the consequences of his act, if he foresees
the probability that it will occur, but does not desire it nor consequences, or that he
does not care what happens.
An attitude of mental indifference to obvious risk. Recklessness is legally equal to
intention
Not mere desire but foresight of consequence makes his act a crime
Negligence
Want of care and precautions, which a reasonable man would have taken under the particular
circumstances of the case.

It is the state of mind of a man, who pursues a course of conduct without adverting at all to its
consequences.

Negligence doe not indicate a specific attitude of mind, but states a matter of fact, which may be
result of either intentional or negligence act.

Negligence is the lack of attention or due care that a reasonable or prudent person
may have while performing any task. For a negligent act to turn into criminal
negligence its degree shall be high enough to cause criminal liability.
Voluntarily
The act voluntarily done in effect and substance means an act done intentionally, with the
knowledge of the end result being a crime and the doer had reason to believe that the actus reus
would be an offence.

The person doing an act had the knowledge of what they are doing and had full
control of their actions. Voluntarily can be used to show intention as well. It is
used only because it has more extended meaning than ‘intentionally.’
Stages of Crime
1. Intention
The intention is the first stage of any offense and is known as the mental or psycho stage. In this
stage, the offender decides the motive and decides his course or direction towards the offense. 
Moreover, being the mental concept, it is very difficult to judge if a person possesses any such
intention. Just by having an intention will not constitute an offense.

2. Preparation
Preparation is the second stage amongst the stages of crime. It means to arrange the
necessary resources for the execution of the intentional criminal act. Intention and
preparation alone are not enough to constitute a crime. Preparation is not punishable
because in many cases the prosecution fails to prove that the preparations in the question
are for the execution of the particular crime.
Generally, preparation to commit any offence is not punishable but in some exceptional cases
preparation is punishable, following are some examples of such exceptional circumstances-

· Preparation to wage war against the Government - Section 122, IPC 1860;

· Preparation to commit depredation on territories of a power at peace with Government of

India- Section 126, IPC 1860;

· Preparation to commit dacoity- Section 399, IPC 1860;

· Preparation for counterfeiting of coins or Government stamps- Sections 233-235, S. 255 and
S. 257;

· Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged documents. Mere
possession of these is a crime and no possessor can plead that he is still at the stage of
preparation- Sections 242, 243, 259, 266 and 474 .
3. Attempt
An attempt is a direct movement towards the execution of a crime after the preparation of
the plan. According to law, a person is guilty of an attempt to commit an offense if he/she
does an act which is more than simply preparatory to the commission of the offense.
Moreover, a person is guilty of attempting to commit an offense even though the facts are
such that the execution of the offense seems to be impossible.
4. Accomplishment
The last stage in the commission of an offense is its successful completion. If the accused
becomes successful in his attempt to commit the crime, he will be guilty of the complete
offense. Moreover, if his attempt is unsuccessful he will be guilty of his attempt.
 For safe, orderly, peaceful and prosperous
society to exist and flourish – the following
tools of theory are found to be good guides:
1. Deterrent Theory
2. Preventive Theory
3. Retributive Theory
4. Reformative Theory

Theories of 5. Expiatory Theory

Punishment 6. Multiple Approach theory

RETRIBUTIVE THEORY
“Tooth for Tooth, Eye for Eye, Limb for Limb and Nail for Nail” –
principle of this theory.
• Earlier, legal sanctions grounded in vengeance and retaliation -
revenge is justice gone wild.
• found to be archaic, inhuman and barbaric – modern human rights
philosophy condemns this cruel concept
Just Desert
Under this perspective, the perpetrator deserves to be punished in proportion to
the past harm he or she committed.
The punishment is an end in itself and needs no further justification.
This approach is typically referred to as a just desert or deservingness
perspective

the punishment should be proportionate to the harm.

DETERRENT THEORY
“I do not punish you for stealing the ship, but so that the ship may not be stolen”
– the central cynosure of the theory.
Not only to prevent the wrongdoer from doing a wrong, but also to make him an
example for others, calculated to curb criminal tendency in others.
At times, severe punishments like death by stoning or whipping, mutilation of
limbs etc are awarded even to minor offences.
This theory lives even to day in many muslim countries
General Deterrence and Specific Deterrence
General Deterrence – General deterrence is designed to prevent crime in the
general population. Thus, the state’s punishment of offenders serves as an
example for others in the general population who have not yet participated in
criminal events.

Specific Deterrence - To deter only the individual offender from committing

that crime in the future. Proponents of specific deterrence also believe that
punishing offenders severely will make them unwilling to reoffend in the future
PREVENTIVE THEORY
• Concentrates on the prisoner to prevent him from repetitive
endeavors – to ward off recidivism.
• Offenders disabled by punishments like death, exile or forfeiture of
office and incarceration.
• Found to be having undesirable effect on first offenders or juvenile
offenders
REFORMATIVE THEORY
• “Condemn the Sin, not the Sinner” – Mahatma Gandhi.
• Reformation process is like a surgeon operating on a person to remove the pain.
• It is a craft or skill in bringing back the tainted and condemned culprits to
national mainstream and civil society, as meaningful citizens.
• Critics hold the prisons as dwelling homes – a satire.
EXPIATORY THEORY
• “To pay for the sin committed”
• Repentance, compunction, atonement and reparation - conscience oriented
cleansing of hearts.
• Offender to serve the victims and their dependents to compensate the deprivation.
• Held impracticable being too idealistic.
• Experimentation of this theory is too expensive in terms of public safety and
security
MULTIPLE APPROACH THEORY
• Application of any single theory may not render complete justice –
• The aforesaid theories are not mutually exclusive.
• hence judicious combination of theories is the latest approach.
• “If the potentials of prisoner-person are unfolded, a robber may
become a Valmiki, and a sinner may become a saint.” – Krishna Iyer.
J. (Rakesh Kaushik vs. Supdt. Central Jail)
Thank You