Section 101 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): Murder

The etymology of the term ‘murder’ derives from the Germanic word morth meaning Secret Killing. It refers to the unlawful and premeditated killing of one or more people with the express purpose of terminating the life of the target. Wait, Murder is simply not the definition given an offence where it does not even include a purposeful act which IPC in its definition of murder describes as culpable homicide. 

Each murder is a homicide, though not each murder is a homicide. Section 101  of the BNS provides the definition of the term ‘murder’ and also indicates the instances when culpable homicide should not be deemed as murder in five cases.

The process of defining culpable homicide as murder can be found in Section 101 of BNS. It says that everything that a person does that is likely to cause death or that they plan to kill someone is considered murder. There are still some situations in which culpable homicide is not regarded as murder. 

These limitations include circumstances such as provocation, in which an individual loses control after being provoked. Self-defence, in which an individual kills to prevent serious injury from occurring and allowed public duties, such as when a police officer is performing their official duties. Also, some deaths may not be classified as murder, such as those that happen during violent fights, in situations where both parties are equally involved or when permission is granted for potentially hazardous activity. 

Section 101 of BNS

The definition of responsible homicide as murder is given in Section 101 of the BNS along with a list of exclusions. The definition includes intent to cause death, behaviour that is extremely likely to cause death and circumstances in which culpable homicide is not considered murder, such as provocation, self-defence, lawful public obligations, unexpected fights and consent.

Section 101 of BNS is part of CHAPTER VI OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY in Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

• Statement: 

Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder,–– 

1.  if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death; or

2.  if the act by which the death is caused 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 

3. if the act by which the death is caused 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; or

4. if the person committing the act by which the death is caused, 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.

• Illustration: 

1. A shoots Z with the intention of killing him. Z dies in consequence. A commits murder.

2. A, knowing that Z is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. Z dies in consequence of the blow. A is guilty of murder, although the blow might not have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of a person in a sound state of health. But if A, not knowing that Z is labouring under any disease, gives him such a blow as would not in the ordinary course of nature kill a person in a sound state of health, here A, although he may intend to cause bodily injury, is not guilty of murder, if he did not intend to cause death or such bodily injury as in the ordinary course of nature would cause death.

3. A intentionally gives Z a sword-cut or club-wound sufficient to cause the death of a man in the ordinary course of nature. Z dies in consequence. Here A is guilty of murder, although he may not have intended to cause Z’s death.

4. A without any excuse fires a loaded cannon into a crowd of persons and kills one of them.Ais guilty of murder, although he may not have had a premeditated design to kill any particular individual.

• Exception 1:

Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident: Provided that the provocation is not,–– 

1. sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for killing or doing harm to any person; 

2. given by anything done in obedience to the law or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant;

3.  given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence

• Explanation: 

Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to murder is a question of fact.

• Illustration:

1. A, under the influence of passion excited by a provocation given by Z, intentionally kills Y, Z’s child. This is murder, in as much as the provocation was not given by the child and the death of the child was not caused by accident or misfortune in doing an act caused by the provocation.

2. Y gives grave and sudden provocation to A. A, on this provocation, fires a pistol at Y, neither intending nor knowing himself to be likely to kill Z, who is near him, but out of sight. A kills Z. HereA has not committed murder, but merely culpable homicide.

3. A is lawfully arrested by Z, a bailiff. A is excited to sudden and violent passion by the arrest and kills Z. This is murder, in as much as the provocation was given by a thing done by a public servant in the exercise of his powers.

4. A appears as a witness before Z, a Magistrate. Z says that he does not believe a word of A’s deposition and that A has perjured himself. A is moved to sudden passion by these words and kills Z. This is murder.

5. A attempts to pull Z’s nose. Z, in the exercise of the right of private defence, lays hold of A to prevent him from doing so. A is moved to sudden and violent passion in consequence and kills Z. This is murder, in as much as the provocation was giving by a thing done in the exercise of the right of private defence. 

6. Z strikes B. B is by this provocation excited to violent rage.A, a bystander, intending to take advantage of B’s rage and to cause him to kill Z, puts a knife into B’s hand for that purpose. B kills Z with the knife. Here B may have committed only culpable homicide, but A is guilty of murder

• Exception 2:

Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender in the exercise in good faith of the right of private defence 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 defence without premeditation and without any intention of doing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of such defence.

• Illustration:

Z attempts to horsewhip A, not in such a manner as to cause grievous hurt to A. A draws out a pistol. Z persists in the assault. A believing in good faith that he can by no other means prevent himself from being horsewhipped, shoots Z dead. A has not committed murder but only culpable homicide.

• 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 powers 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.

• 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’s having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.

• Explanation:

It is immaterial in such cases which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault. 

• 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.

• Illustration:

A, by instigation, voluntarily causes Z, a child to commit suicide. Here, on account of Z’s youth, he was incapable of giving consent to his own death; A has therefore abetted murder.

Definition of Murder under Section 101

Section 101 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) defines murder in clear terms, focusing on intent and knowledge of the probable outcome. As per the section, a person is guilty of murder if:

• The act is carried out with the intention to cause death.
• The act is done with the intention to cause bodily harm, which the offender knows is likely to result in death.
• The act is done in such a way that it is imminently dangerous and the offender knows it is likely to cause death without any justification for the risk​.

Simplified Explanation of the Definition

Let’s break it down:

• If a person intends to kill someone and carries out an act that results in death, it’s considered murder.
• Even if the person only intends to cause serious injury but knows the injury is severe enough to cause death, it still qualifies as murder.
• Finally, if a person acts in a way that’s clearly dangerous and likely to result in death and they do so without any valid excuse, it’s murder. This last clause is crucial, as it covers reckless acts such as firing into a crowd or causing a fatal accident while driving recklessly.

People Also Read: Difference Between IPC and BNS

What is Chapter VI of Offence Affecting the Human Body?

Chapter VI deals with the offence affecting the human body under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Offences affecting the human body are covered from sections 100 to 146 of the BNS. This includes: 

Culpable homicide, Inhumane violations, Hurt, Kidnapping and abduction, Wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement, Criminal force and assault, Slavery and forced labour and Sexual offences.

The Evolution from IPC to BNS

India’s criminal laws have witnessed significant reform with the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in 2023. This act replaces the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which had governed criminal law since 1860. The purpose of BNS is to modernize the legal framework and address the complexities of 21st-century crime. With crimes becoming more intricate due to technological, social and economic changes, this new legislation introduces more relevant and precise provisions.

Why Replace Section 300 of IPC with Section 101 of BNS?

Section 101 of BNS, which deals with murder, replaces Section 300 of the IPC. The shift is not merely cosmetic but addresses the need for clearer definitions and handling of cases like culpable homicide and murder. In the previous IPC framework, while Section 300 laid out the grounds for murder, the nuances often left room for varied interpretations, leading to prolonged legal debates. Section 101 streamlines these definitions, aligning them with current legal standards while also factoring in advanced forensics and criminal psychology.

By refining the legal language, Section 101 ensures better clarity in distinguishing between murder and culpable homicide, a distinction that has been pivotal in India’s legal history. This shift is expected to help the judiciary deliver quicker and more precise judgments.

Legal Implications and Future Trends

Section 101 of BNS effect on India’s criminal justice system

With the implementation of Section 101 under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita it is believed that murder cases will be handled by India’s criminal justice system more quickly and effectively. Courts are projected to issue verdicts more quickly because to the BNS’s simplified definitions and more distinct legal distinctions, which will help to clear the backlog of criminal cases that has long been a problem for the Indian judiciary. 

Key Effects:

1. Faster Judgment: 

Section 101 of BNS clear language removes a lot of the uncertainty found in Section 300 of the IPC, allowing the courts to make decisions more quickly. This will be especially crucial in overworked courts where protracted murder trial delays have been an issue.

2. Enhanced Defense Against the Vulnerable:

The exceptions listed in Section 101, such as those for self-defense and significant provocation, guarantee that the law considers specific situations. Because BNS better frames the behaviours of vulnerable people, particularly those acting out of fear or unexpected passion, they may receive a fairer trial.

3. Stronger Penalties for Careless Behavior: 

Section 101 also subjected people to harsher penalties for careless acts that cause fatalities. This covers circumstances in which a person exhibits risky behaviour without intending to kill, such as firing a weapon into a crowd. The focus on recklessness helps close legal loopholes that might have existed under the IPC​.

Possible Changes in Jurisdiction

Legal professionals foresee a change in the handling of murder and culpable homicide cases as the judiciary adjusts to the BNS. Possible outcomes include:

1. More dependable decisions: 

Judges should be expected to make more consistent decisions in various instances if there were clearer guidelines.

2. Unique cases: 

New cases may arise when courts start interpreting Section 101, especially in regards to mental health, abrupt provocation and irresponsible behavior.

How BNS is Expected to Impact Legal Education in Future?

The adoption of BNS is expected to cause a change in the legal education and training environment. Universities will have to revise their courses to account for the new BNS with a special focus on current criminal law theories, forensic psychology and criminal intent. Provocation, intent and the role of mental health in criminal cases will require more thorough training for future legal professionals.

Components of Section 101 of BNS

1. Causing Death: 

The goal must be to bring about death.

2. Doing an act: 

It must have been the intention to inflict a kind of physical harm that is fatal. 

3. The act must be done:  

It must be carried out knowing that doing so could result in another person dying. 

• Section 101 of the BNS also provides for certain exceptions in the prohibition against culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Clauses 1-4 of section 101 give the essential ingredients in which culpable homicide constitutes murder. 
• Section 101 after laying down the condition in which culpable homicide amounts to murder, proceeds to state some exceptional situations wherein if death is caused, it is reduced to culpable homicide and not murder, which is punishable under section 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and not under Section 103 BNS.

The exceptions are:

• severe and abrupt provocation
• Using legal authority
• individual defence
• In the event of passive euthanasia, consent
• In an unexpected altercation without planning.

Exceptions to Murder Under BNS Section 101

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita defines murder in Section 101, although it also lists several circumstances in which culpable homicide is not considered murder. These exceptions are important because they add variety to the law by covering scenarios in which the circumstances surrounding the offender’s conduct, even when they result in death, do not qualify as murder.

Serious and abrupt provocation, self-defence, public workers acting in good faith, unexpected fights and situations in which the victim gives permission to die are among the exceptions.​

Exception 1: Grave and Sudden Provocation

One of the most important exceptions under Section 101 is when the act is committed under grave and sudden provocation. This allows the law to differentiate between premeditated murder and actions taken in the heat of passion. If someone kills another person while deprived of self-control due to sudden provocation, it may be considered culpable homicide, not murder. However, the provocation must not be sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender​.

Example: K.M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra (1961) 

In this case, Naval Officer Nanavati shot his wife’s lover in a moment of rage. Though this case initially raised questions on murder, it was later ruled as culpable homicide due to the sudden and grave provocation Nanavati faced​.

Important Conditions for Provocation:

• The provocation must not be planned or intentionally triggered by the offender.
• The provocation cannot come from lawful acts, such as those done by a public servant exercising their duties​.

Exception 2: Self-Defense Exceeding Lawful Limits

Another exception outlined in Section 101 is when the offender exceeds the right of self-defense. If a person, while defending themselves or their property, causes death without premeditation and without the intent to do more harm than necessary, it may be considered culpable homicide, not murder. This exception recognizes that individuals acting in defense may overstep legal boundaries, but their actions are not fully intentional​.

Example: Darshan Singh vs. State of Punjab (2010)

In this case, the court ruled that exceeding the right of private defense could be considered an exception to murder if the offender acted in good faith and without malice​.

Exception 3: Acts by Public Servants in Good Faith

If a public servant or someone assisting a public servant, causes death while performing their duties, it is not considered murder if the act was done in good faith without any ill-will or intention to cause death. This ensures that law enforcement officers and officials are not penalized for unintended consequences while carrying out their lawful duties​.

Exception 4: Sudden Fights and Quarrels

Deaths caused during sudden fights or quarrels without premeditation also fall under the exceptions. In these cases, the offender is not seen as having acted with malice or having taken undue advantage, which reduces the crime to culpable homicide. The focus is on whether the fight was spontaneous and whether the offender acted in a cruel or unusual manner​.

Exception 5: Consent of the Victim

When a person over the age of 18 consents to take a risk that may result in death, the person causing the death may not be guilty of murder. This exception is rare but important for situations where individuals willingly participate in dangerous activities

Difference between Section 302 of IPC and Section 101 of BNS 

Section 302 of IPC covered murder and provided same punishments (life imprisonment or death). To assist judges in making these sentencing judgments, the BNS has developed stronger rules in an effort to expedite the legal system and ensure that justice is delivered more quickly. 

Comparing Section 300 of  IPC with Section 101 BNS

Though Section 101 comes mainly from Section 300 of the IPC, it enhances the previous legislation by clarifying and sharpening some terminology. Due to conflicting interpretations under the IPC, numerous cases of culpable homicide that did not qualify as murder were discussed for years. In order to remedy this, BNS Section 101 establishes more stringent rules for the transition from culpable homicide to murder.

The Importance of Little Differences

The way that BNS Section 101 handles intent is one of the key differences. The new laws allow for the charge of murder even in cases where the criminal knew the act was likely to result in death but yet took a reckless course of action that did not have the express purpose to kill. This modification makes people more liable for risky behaviours that could result in deaths, even when those behaviours weren’t planned. 

Comparative Analysis with IPC

How Section 101 of BNS Differs from Section 300 of IPC?

Section 300 of the IPC, which defined the crime of murder in India, is mainly the model for Section 101 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). To enable accurate distinctions and expedited judicial proceedings in homicide cases, BNS Section 101, on the other hand, introduces a number of significant modifications. Let’s explore the primary variations: 

1. Language and Clarity: 

Compared to Section 300 of the IPC, Section 101 language is intended to be more clearer minimising uncertainty in the meaning of purpose and harm. Sharpening legal terminology is part of BNS’s effort to reduce drawn-out legal arguments and promote quicker, clearer decisions.

2. Improved Concept of Provocation and Purpose: 

Although provocation was acknowledged as a mitigating element under Section 300 IPC, Section 101 BNS offers a more complex definition of provocation, particularly in relation to grave and unexpected provocation. Understanding the accused’s mental state is important in the current setting and BNS better addresses this by taking into account developments in forensic psychology and criminal behavior research.

3. Extending the Use of Self-Defense: 

The defence of self-defence against charges of murder is permitted under both the IPC and the BNS. However, Section 101 provides improved criteria for identifying situations in which the use of excessive force is still classified as culpable homicide rather than murder. The goal of this modification is to give people who act in risky situations out of fear or pressure additional protection. 

What are Similarities Between Section 101 and Section 300?

Although Section 101 brings about significant changes, it keeps many of the basic concepts of Section 300 IPC:

1. Both laws continue to rely heavily on intention and purpose when defining murder.

2. In all legal systems, the penalties—life in prison or the death penalty—remain equal with the seriousness of the offense.

3. Both factors classify some homicides as culpable homicide, especially in cases when there isn’t a clear motive to kill. 

Is BNS Section 101 cognisable offence or non-cognisable offence?

The BNS in Section 101 classifies murder as a Cognisable Offense which means a police officer can arrest any person for such offense without the intervention of a magistrate or prior order. A Sessions Court is competent to try any case of the offences described under section 101.

Is BNS Section 101 Bailable or Non-Bailable?

The offence under IPC section 101 is classified as one that is not subject to bail. It is also thought to be an offence that cannot be compounded.

What is Punishment for Murder under BNS Section 101?

Legal Effects for Murder

If an individual is found guilty of murder under Section 101 of BNS, they would face severe punishments. Section 103 of the BNS outlines the punishments for murder, which are designed to uphold justice and guarantee that those found guilty of heinous crimes would suffer severe consequences. 

The section 103 of BNS lays down punishment for section 101 of BNS. Section 103 provides for punishment for murder. As per this Section, the following certainly applies on a murderer:

1. Capital Punishment (Death Sentence): The death sentence is permitted by law in situations where the murder was extremely brutal or when the victim was weak, such a child or an old person. This is usually saved for the very rarest of circumstances in which life in jail is thought to be insufficient to carry out justice.

2. Life imprisonment: The most common sentence for murder is life in prison, which assures that the offender will stay in jail for the rest of their natural life (although release may be granted in certain circumstances). This punishment is typically chosen by courts when the crime does not meet the requirements for the death penalty.

3. Imposition of fine: In addition to imprisonment, the court may impose fines on the offender, particularly in cases where the victim’s family requires compensation or where the state incurs substantial costs​.

Deciding Between Life Imprisonment and Death 

1. Nature of the Offense: Was it planned or carried out in an outburst of anger?

2. Victim’s vulnerability: Was the victim helpless to defend themselves, an old person or a child?
3. Brutality: How harsh or violent was the deed? The likelihood of receiving the death penalty increases with the severity of the crime. 

How to file/defend your case for Section 101 Bns offence?

The case shall, however, begin with the lodgment of a First Information Report at the nearest police station to the place of incident under Section 101.

How to defend?

It is recommended that anyone who faces an accusation provided under Section 101 BNS or any of the provisions suggested within Section 101 BNS get the services of a competent criminal lawyer. This is due to the fact that offences under section 101 are serious criminal offences, non-bailable with a range of penalties that include death or life imprisonment and a fine for the offender.

Be it a petty or even a serious criminal charge, it is still a great concern. In the event that a person is accused of a crime, the individual stands the chances of suffering extreme forms of punishment and consequences. This is why professional assistance of qualified criminal lawyers is made a priority. A criminal lawyer can assist you in knowing:

• The nature of the charges filed
• Any defences available
• What kind of plea bargains are most likely to be offered;
• What is expected after trial or conviction?

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 101

Section	101
Offence	MURDER
Punishment	Punishable under Section 103
Cognisable or Non-cognisable	Cognisable
Bailable or Non-bailable	Non-bailable
By What Court Triable	Triable by Court of Session

Example with BNS Section 101 Application

Example 1: Direct Intent to Kill

Imagine a situation where A shoots B with a gun, intending to kill him. B dies as a result. This is a clear case of murder under Section 101 because A had a direct intention to kill B. The act was premeditated and the outcome—death—was the intended result​.

Example 2: Death Caused Due to Known Health Conditions

Consider a scenario where A strikes B, knowing that B is suffering from a heart condition. The blow, though not enough to kill a healthy person, causes B to die due to his pre-existing condition. In this case, A is still guilty of murder because he was aware of B’s vulnerability and intended to cause harm, even if death was not the immediate goal​.

Example 3: Reckless Act Without Direct Intent

Now, imagine A fires a loaded cannon into a crowded marketplace without any specific target. One person dies as a result. Here, A may not have intended to kill anyone, but the act was so dangerous and reckless that it qualifies as murder under Section 101. A had no valid reason to risk lives and the result was a foreseeable outcome of his actions​.

Example 4: Provocation Leading to Death

In a different scenario, A finds out that B has insulted him in public, causing him to lose his temper. In a fit of rage, A strikes B and B dies. If A acted under grave and sudden provocation, this could fall under an exception to murder and be considered culpable homicide, not murder​.

Example 5: Sudden Quarrels or Self-Defense: Legal Nuances

If a death occurs in a sudden fight or if someone is defending themselves but uses excessive force, Section 101 provides a pathway to reduce the charge from murder to culpable homicide. 

For example, if A and B get into a heated argument and A stabs B in the heat of passion, the lack of premeditation might exempt A from a murder charge. Similarly, if A kills B in self-defence but uses excessive force, A could also be charged with culpable homicide, not murder

Case Laws on Section 101 of BNS(from section 300 & 302 of IPC)

1. Vasanth vs State of Maharashtra:

In the landmark case of Vasanth v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court dealt with a case where the offender purposefully drove over the complainant in his jeep, leading to the death of the complainant. The defendant did not openly admit to wishing to kill any persons, but the court inferred that he did dynamic behaviour.

The court held that the defendant possessed the motive to kill, by reason of the deliberate and reckless manner in which he drove his vehicle towards the victim and the impossibility of any plausible excuse.

2. Willie (William) Slaney vs State of Madhya Pradesh:

Illustrative examples help elucidate the effective application of this clause 2 of Section 101 BNS. In the case of Willie (William) Slaney v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the victim died after the accused inflicted a blow on his head using a hockey stick during a quarrel.

However, the accused was convicted with a lesser crime, as the Supreme Court found that the accused did not possess the type of evidence necessary to corroborate that a Clause (2) death was more likely than not.

3. State of Karnataka vs Shariff, AIR 2003 SC1074:

During cross-examination, the five year old son of the deceased testified that he was at the house of his grandmother when he saw his mother on fire. This statement is fairly credible with respect to the facts of the incident in question and cannot be disregarded; therefore, the accused must be held responsible. Therefore, the child witness cannot be rebutted that the child’s father tied the hands and legs of his mother then burnt her.

4. K.M. Nanavati vs the State of Maharashtra, 1961 (AIR 1962 SC 605):

The Indian jurisprudential principles on the subject of provocation were collated and appraised by the apex court which ruled that:

Test of ‘’sudden and grave provocation’’: A reasonable man belonging to the societal sphere of the accused and put in the same situation as that of the accused, would not be expected to keep his/her self-composure.

Even in some circumstances, such exception might also apply to an accused, where such expression causes such extreme and intense provocation to an accused as to make him act.

The state of mind of the victim is relevant even when there is past conduct of that individual that may suggest that the act which follows cannot be regarded as indicative of sudden loss of self-control so as to constitute provocation.

The passion which causes the fatal strike must be shown to have been the effect of an immediate and extreme provocation. It must not be a time that comes after the victim has been provoked for a time period and therefore can allow the defendant to tamper with evidence.

5. Selvaraj vs State of Tamil Nadu (1998) 9 SCC 308: 

In the present circumstance, the defendant stabbed the complainant on the left side of the chest with a knife drawing it downwards due to some conflict. The victims intestines were ejected out of the belly accompanied by blood loss. In this particular case, the apex court pronounced that there was malice aforethought on the part of the accused as was evident from the act of the accused and as a result the accused was culpable of murder.

6.  K.M. Nanavati vs State of Maharashtra (1961)

One of the most well-known court cases in Indian history is the Nanavati case, which serves as an excellent illustration of severe and abrupt provocation. After learning of his wife’s extramarital affair, naval officer Nanavati shot her lover out of fury. The court found him guilty of murder at first but after an appeal, the verdict was modified to culpable homicide because of the abrupt provocation brought on by learning about the affair. India’s legal framework for provocation under the IPC and BNS was influenced by this case. 

7. Virsa Singh vs State of Punjab (1958)

Important rules for judging intent and whether physical harm in a murder prosecution is sufficient were established in the Virsa Singh case. In this instance, the Supreme Court decided that an offense is considered murder if the offender’s physical harm is severe enough to very certainly result in death in the normal course of events. Section 101 of BNS reflects the distinction that the case made clear between intentional harm and mere awareness of possible harm. 

8. R. Punnayya vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1977)

Through a focus on the offender’s purpose and the type of injury caused, the Punnayya case further distinguished between culpable homicide and murder. The court decided that an act qualifies as murder when the perpetrator intended to cause enough harm to result in death. Understanding how courts interpret intent in accordance with Section 101 requires an understanding of this case. 

9. Darshan Singh vs State of Punjab  (2010)

The Supreme Court defined the boundaries of self-defence in this case. The court ruled that killing someone without intending to kill them qualifies as an exemption to the murder rule when someone goes beyond the bounds of justifiable self-defence. This decision ensures that persons defending themselves receive equal protection under the law by paying close attention to Exception 2 of Section 101. 

Current Data on India’s Murder Sentences

Recent studies state that during the past few years, India has seen an average of 30,000 murder cases annually. Only a small percentage of these cases resulted in a death sentence since, unless the offence is extremely severe, judges prefer life imprisonment. This shows how uncommon the death penalty is even when someone is found guilty of murder. 

Conclusion

Section 101 of the BNS deals with Murder. This is considered to be one of the most heinous crimes. It is neither, short of the taking of another’s life on purpose, premeditated murder which carries with it somewhere from fines, to life sentence imprisonment or penile death sentence. 

Death penalty is given only in very dangerous situations, as the Court upholds the policy of respect for life. The Court may exercise their discretion and commuted the sentence. Outside of betrayal of one’s country and incitement to rebellion, the act of killing is one of the most heinous crimes that one can conceive of.

Frequently Asked Questions on Section 101 of BNS

Q1. What is Section 101 of BNS?

Ans1. The definition of, responsible homicide as murder is given in Section 101 of the BNS along with a list of exclusions. The definition includes intent to cause death, behaviour that is extremely likely to cause death and circumstances in which culpable homicide is not considered murder, such as provocation, self-defence, lawful public obligations, unexpected fights and consent.

Q2. Under what circumstances does BNS Section 101 consider culpable homicide to be murder?

Ans2. A culpable homicide is defined as murder if it involves activities that are right away harmful and likely to end in death or such injury or if it involves the purpose to cause bodily injury likely to result in death.

Q3. What are the Exception of culpable homicide not being considered murder?

Ans3. The exceptions are:

• severe and abrupt provocation
• Using legal authority
• individual defence
• In the event of passive euthanasia, consent
• In an unexpected altercation without planning.

Q4. What is the BNS 101 Act?

Ans4. Under specific circumstances, murder is classified as a type of culpable homicide under BNS Section 101. It encompasses behaviours that are intended to cause death, bodily harm that is likely to result in death or behaviours that are so risky that they are likely to result in death.

Q5. What is Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice Act?

Ans5. A kid who has reached or is older than sixteen years old cannot challenge any acquittal order issued by the Board about a minor who is suspected of committing an offence other than the heinous offence.

Q6. Is murder considered a cognisable or non-cognisable offence under Section 101?

Ans6. Murder under Section 101 is classified as a cognisable offence, meaning that police can arrest without a warrant.

Q7. What are Section 101 punishments for murder? 

Ans7. Murder is defined in section 101 but its penalty is given in section 103. According to Section 103 of the BNS, the punishments can be death, life in prison or fines.

Q8. Is Section 101 Bailable or Non-Bailable?

Ans8. No, offences under Section 101 are non-bailable, meaning the accused cannot be released on bail.

Q9. What role does provocation play in homicide cases? 

Ans9. If provocation results in a lack of self-control, it can reduce the allegation of murder to culpable homicide, as long as the provocation was not requested or willingly created by the offender.

Q10. How does Section 101 differ from Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)?

Ans10. Section 101 of BNS refines the definition of murder, providing clearer guidelines on intent and recklessness. It also introduces better-defined exceptions, such as those for provocation and self-defence, making it easier for courts to distinguish between murder and culpable homicide.

Q11. Is reckless behaviour considered murder under Section 101?

Ans11. Yes, reckless acts that are imminently dangerous and likely to result in death without any justification, are considered murder under Section 101 even if there was no specific intent to kill.

Q12. Does Section 101 apply to all cases of homicide in India?

Ans12. Section 101 applies to cases registered after July 1, 2024. Cases filed before this date will still be judged based on the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This section consolidates and modernises the provisions relating to murder in India.

Q13. How is murder distinguished from culpable homicide under Section 101?

Ans13. Murder under Section 101 involves intent to kill or cause serious injury likely to result in death, while culpable homicide may lack such clear intent or be mitigated by factors like provocation or self-defence.