Question

Ramu is suffering from disease of the heart. Rahul his heir rushes into his room and shouts in his ear "your house has been destroyed by fire" intending thereby to kill Ramu. Ramu dies of the shock. Here Rahul is liable for the offence of

• A. Attempt to murder
• B. Murder
• C. Culpable homicide
• D. Abetment to murder

Hint:

To solve questions on murder/culpable homicide, follow a two-step process. First, check if the act is culpable homicide under Section 299 (is there intention or knowledge?). Second, check if this culpable homicide is elevated to murder under Section 300 (does it fit one of the four clauses and not the exceptions?).

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks to determine the offence committed by Rahul based on his act, intention, knowledge, and the resulting death of Ramu. This requires an analysis under the provisions for culpable homicide and murder in the Indian Penal Code.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
1. Causation: Did Rahul cause Ramu's death? Explanation 1 to Section 299 (Culpable Homicide) states that a person who causes bodily injury to another who is labouring under a disorder and thereby accelerates their death is deemed to have caused that death. Causing a severe shock which leads to a fatal heart attack in a person known to have a heart condition qualifies as causing death.
2. Culpable Homicide (Section 299): Is the act culpable homicide? It is, if it is done with: (a) the intention of causing death; or (b) the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or (c) the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. The facts explicitly state that Rahul acted with the intention to kill Ramu. So, condition (a) is met. The act is culpable homicide.
3. Murder (Section 300): Is the culpable homicide murder? Culpable homicide is murder if the act by which the death is caused falls under any of the four clauses of Section 300. - Clause 1 of Section 300: "culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death..." Since the facts clearly state that Rahul's intention was to kill Ramu, his act directly falls under the first clause of Section 300. It is murder. It does not fall under any of the exceptions to Section 300.
Step 3: Final Answer:
Here Rahul is liable for the offence of Murder.

Answer 2

The question asks what offence Rahul has committed after intentionally shocking Ramu, a heart patient, to death. Let's test each option against Sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code.

1. Attempt to murder: An attempt applies only where the intended consequence, death, does not actually occur. Here, Ramu did die as a direct result of Rahul's act, so the offence is complete and cannot be merely an attempt.
2. Murder: Rahul acted with the specific intention of causing Ramu's death, and caused it by inducing a fatal shock, exploiting Ramu's known heart condition. Explanation 1 to Section 299 confirms that accelerating the death of a person suffering from a disorder by causing them harm counts as causing death. Since the act was done with the clear intention of causing death, it falls squarely within Clause 1 of Section 300, making it murder, and none of the exceptions to Section 300 apply on these facts.
3. Culpable homicide: Every murder is a form of culpable homicide, so this is not wrong in itself, but it is the broader, less specific category. Since these facts squarely satisfy the requirements for the aggravated form (murder under Section 300, Clause 1), the more precise and correct classification is murder rather than the residual culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
4. Abetment to murder: Abetment involves inciting, engaging in a conspiracy with, or aiding another person to commit an offence. Rahul did not induce a third party to kill Ramu, he directly caused Ramu's death himself, so this is principal liability for murder, not abetment of someone else's act.

Since Rahul directly and intentionally caused Ramu's death by exploiting his heart condition, and this falls within Clause 1 of Section 300 without any applicable exception, the offence is murder itself, not merely an attempt, the lesser residual category, or abetment.

Therefore, the correct answer is Murder.