ASSIGNMENT ON

MURDER UNDER SECTION 300,302 AND 303 OF IPC

SUBMITTED TO
SIDDHARTH COLLEGE OF LAW
By
Mr. Anup Anil Kamble
Roll No. 2076
SY-LLB
SIDDHARTH COLLEGE OF LAW
Mumbai - 400023
2020-2021

Date of Submission: - 28th JULY 2021

1
SR TOPIC PAGE
NO NO
1. SECTION 300 3
2. SECTION 302 4
3. SECTION 303 5

2
 MURDER UNDER SECTION 300,302 AND 303
MURDER UNDER SECTION 300 OF IPC
• Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act
by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death.

• Secondly If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the
offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is
caused, or

• Thirdly If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and
the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of
nature to cause death

• Fourthly if the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently

dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is
likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the
risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.

Exception 1 - When Culpable Homicide is not Murder- Culpable homicide is not murder
if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave or sudden
provocation, causes the death of the person who provoked him or by mistake or
accidentally causes the death of any other person.

Exception 2 - Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, in the exercise in good
faith of the right of private defense of person or property, exceeds the power given to him
by law and causes the death of the person against whom he is exercising such right of
defense without premeditation, and without any intention of doing more harm than is
necessary for the purpose of such defense.

Exception 3 - Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, being a public servant or
aiding a public servant acting for the advancement of public justice, exceeds the power
given to him by law, and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith, believes to
be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty as such public servant and
without ill- will towards the person whose death is caused.

3
Exception 4 - Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation
in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender
having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.

Exception 5 - Culpable homicide is not murder when the person whose death is caused,
being above the age of eighteen years, suffers death or takes the risk of death with his
own consent.

MURDER UNDER SECTION 302 OF IPC

Section 302 is one of the most important sections of the Indian Penal Code. The section
provides punishment for the offence of Murder. Section 302 states that whoever commits
murder shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to
fine.

”In other words, the Indian Penal Code prescribes only two kinds of punishment, death
sentence and imprisonment for life, out of which one shall be imposed on the accused if
found guilty of the crime and shall also be liable for fines if the court so deems necessary.

For holding a person liable under sec 302 IPC, it is necessary to prove that the act
committed amounts to the offence of Murder as defined under section 300 of the IPC and
punishment for which is provided under Sec 302 Indian Penal Code.

A person is said to commit the offence of murder when being a person of sound mind, he
kills any other reasonable person. The intention and knowledge of a person while
committing the act plays a major role here.

As provided under the Code, section 302 Indian Penal Code provides an alternative
punishment of either death or imprisonment for life with a particular amount of fine, if an
accused is found guilty of murder.

Punishment leading to the death penalty is given in the rarest of rare cases. This principle
was laid down in the case of Bachan Singh v. the State of Punjab. The Constitutional
validity of Death Sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court in the case of Jagmohan
Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, where it was alleged that Death sentence is contrary to
Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution and violates the fundamental rights of a
person. The court held that “no law could deprive a citizen of life unless it was
reasonable and in the public interest.”

The measures which need to be followed and guidelines to determine rarest of rare cases
were laid down in the case of Machhi Singh v. the State of Punjab. These guidelines are:

• The manner of Commission of Murder

• The motive for Commission of Murder
4
 • Anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime.
• The magnitude of the crime.
• The personality of the victim of murder

The concept of murder in itself is a very broad concept. Except for the exceptions
provided in section 300 IPC, whoever with proper knowledge and intention murders any
person, shall be liable to punishment under the ambit of this section.

Punishment in the cases of murder solely depends on the nature and gravity of the
offence and could be either death penalty or life imprisonment.
For establishing the offence under IPC 302, motive, intention, medical evidence,
eyewitnesses to the particular case plays a vital role. Before holding a person guilty for
committing murder, it should be proved that the person was having prior knowledge and
intention to do so and was very much aware of the consequences of his act.

MURDER UNDER SECTION 303 OF IPC

Punishment for murder by life-convict. Whoever, being under sentence of imprisonment
for life, commits murder, shall be punished with death. Whoever, being under the
sentence of imprisonment of life, commits murder, shall be punished with death. The
section clearly implies that if the accused is convicted with the punishment of life
imprisonment; commits murder, he shall be immediately punished with the death
penalty[1] . -Reason for the inclusion of Section 303 under Indian Penal Code. The
fundamental reason for the inclusion of Section 303 under IPC was that if, even the
sentence of life imprisonment was not sufficient to act as a deterrent and the convict was
hardened enough to commit a murder while serving that sentence, the only punishment
which he deserved was death. Moreover in the 42nd report(1971), the Law Commission
of Indian has observed in Para 16.17(P.239), that “the primary object of making the death
sentence mandatory for an offence under this section seems to be give protection to the
prison staff”. It can be seemed from here that this section was also included in order to
prevent assaults on the white officer.

Difference between Section 302 and Section 303 of Indian Penal Code
Section 302 of Indian Penal Code provides for the sentence of death as an alternative
sentence which may be imposed. The normal sentence for murder is life imprisonment,
and if the death sentence has to be imposed, the court is under a legal obligation under
Section 354(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to state the special reasons for imposing
sentence whereas in Section 303 of Indian Penal Code there is no discretion of the court
in awarding sentences. Henceforth, it is meaningless to hear the accused on the question

5
of sentence and it becomes superfluous to state the reasons for imposing the sentence of
death.
There were three main reasons which concluded the validity of Section 302 of the Penal
Code. Firstly, that the death sentence provided by Section 302 is an alternative to the
sentence of life imprisonment; secondly, that special reasons have to be stated if the
normal rule is departed from and the death sentence has to be imposed; and thirdly,
because the accused is entitled, under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
to be heard on the question of sentence. Therefore, in Section 302 the court has discretion
to impose either of the alternative sentences.
Reason for the unconstitutionality of Section 303 of Indian Penal Code -The section was
not in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. The above-mentioned section
violates the fundamental rights and deprivation of these rights will result into injustice.
Section 303 takes away the judicial discretion in awarding the sentence making Section
235(2) and Section 354(3) of code of criminal procedure pointless. Supreme Court held it
to be irrational as the judicial discretion may not be exercise to decide the fate of the
accused like in other sections of IPC.

There is a distinction between the convictions of a person under S.75 IPC and a person
being under imprisonment under S. 303 IPC. The conviction by a court may be followed
either by the sentence being remitted under the provisions of the code or the sentence
may have been served out. In such cases though the person concerned could still be
spoken of as having been convicted, he cannot be said to be under a sentence. Under S.
75, IPC also it is enough that the person concerned has been earlier convicted. It is not
necessary that the sentence should be in force. But under S. 303, IPC the person’s
sentence must be in force if the person is to be dealt with for a subsequent offence of
murder under that section. It could be clear that the latter section is intended to be
applicable only to cases to which S. 75 of the Indian Penal Code applies.