Q) What is crime? Explain the important ingredients of crime.
Q ) Explain the maxim "actus facit reum nisi mens rea"
Ans)
CRIME
A crime is an act or omission which is prohibited by law.
A crime is injurious to the public , it is punished by the state for the welfare of public at large
A crime is a social offence
ELEMENTS OF CRIME
1) ACTUS REA
2) MENS REA
1) ACTUS REA
The fundamental principle of criminal liability is that there must be a wrong act- actus rea, combined with wrong full intention -mens rea.( meaning an act does not make one guilty unless the mind is also legally blame worthy) . Actus reus is the result of human conduct.
Example- A stabbed B with a knife . The result is the injury to B. it means the injurey is the result of Actus reus.
The actus reus is made up of 3 constitutent parts -
1. Human action which is usually termed as conduct.
2. The result of such act in the specific circumstances which is designated as INJURY
3. such act is prohibited by law
a) Conduct:- Actus reus means 'deed of commision' a result of active condi=uct . Actus reus is the result of the human acts. An act means something voluntarily done by the human being . Human action includes acts of commission as well as acts of ommision . its orgin in some mental or bodily activity or passivity of the doer, that is (1) a willed mascular movement or ommision (1) Its circumstances(30 its consequences.
Example - A shoots B to death with Rifle. the material elements of the act asre-
1.A series of muscular contractions by which the rifle is raised and trigger pulled
2. the rifle is loaded, positioned himself within range
3. The consequence, the fell of the trigger, explosion of the powder ,the discharge of bullet ,resulting in his death all these constitute an act.
b) Acts prohibited by law:- An act is not a crime unless prohibited by law only those acts that the law has chosen to forbid are crimes. No crime is committed when a solider , in a battlefield shoots an enemy , this act being authorized by law . The act is governed by two principle
i) Nullum crimen sine lege ( on one is held criminally liable unless done an act which is expressly forbidden under the existing criminal law of land)
ii) Nulla poena sine lege (no one can be punished for an act unless is made punishable undeer the law)
Example - A shoots at B using a rifle intentionally and B dies. A phu=ysical act that attracts criminal sanctions.
Example - A stabbed b with A knife . The result is the injury to B. It means the injury is the result of actus reus.
2) MENS REA
It is the guilty mind . It is one of the essential elements of criminal liability. Mens rea has been often defined to means a mental elements or a guilty mind or an evil intention menss rea means " an intention to do a forbidden act " It may be defined as "the mental element necessary to constitute criminal liability". No act is perse criminal it becomes criminal only when the doer does it with guilty mind.
The doctrine of mens rea is expressed in familiar latin maxim "actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea" (the act does not make one guilty unless the mind is also guilty.
the important of mens rea can be understood when we consider the application to factual situation . for instance 'A slipped as he walked and fell, he lost his balance and pulled down B with him B hit his head aganist the wall sustained head injury and died.
Here A satisfies one portion of the definition of crime which is doing an act which causes death. But still it does not constitute the offence of murder because another essential element of the offence of murder the intention to cause death is absent. Hence A is not held guilty of murder. Mens rea refers to the mental elemant necessary for the particular crime.
There are 2 prominet case law leading the doctirne of Mens rea
(1) R v/s Prince - Henry prince loved Annie Phillips , an un married girl he took her away with an intention to marry her. The father of the girl reported to police aganist Henry Prionce alleging that princce had illegally taken away his minor girl, below the age of 16 years the police arrested Henry Prince and filed criminal proceedings aganist him. Henry prince was tried for having unlawfully taken away an unmarried girl below the age of 16 years out of the lawfull possession and aganist the will of her father/the natural guardian. The accused contended then he was under the belif that she completed more than 18 years. He also contended that the girl herself told him about her age was more that 18 years . The accused also argued that he had no mens rea(ill-intention)
The jury found upon evidence that before the defendent took her away the girl had told him that she was 18 . However jury held that the accused belief about the age of the girl was no defence. He was argued that the students did not insists on the knowledge of the accused that the girl was under 16 as necessary for conviction be ste aside in the option of criinal intention .16 judges tried the case and all but one unanimously held that prince Henry prince was guilty of kidnapping.
(2) R v/s Tolson : tried under section 57 of the offences against the persons act 1861 for having committed the offence of bigamy. under that section it was an offence for a married person to contract a second marriage during the lifetime of husband or wife, as the case may be. In this case Mrs Tolson married in 1880 in 1881 Mr tolson deserted her and went away. She made all possible enquiries about him and ultimately came to know that her husband Mr Tolson died in the ship accident in America. therefore supporting herself to be a widow she married another man in 1887. The whole story was known to the second husband and the marriage was not kept secret. in the meantime Mr Tolson and suddenly reappeared and prosecuted Mrs Thompson for bigamy
The court of appeal by majority set aside the conviction on the grounds that a Bonafide belief about the death of the first husband at the time of the second marriage was a good defence in the offence of bigamy. It was also opinionated the statutory limitations for the second marriage of 7 years was completed at the time of a second marriage and she informed the real facts to the second husband . hence it is acquitted the accused.
