304 ipc or 304 a ipc
anil kumar agarwal
(Querist) 08 April 2013
This query is : Resolved
two cops were on duty in the evening , both carrying pistol . pistol of one of them got some problem other tried to correct and a round got fired by which other one shot dead, what is the offence 304 or 304 a ipc
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 09 April 2013
Both rash and negligent acts are different from each other. What brings the difference between them is the mental state of mind involved in both the acts. While in negligence there is no intention involved while in rashness it is actually the intention to perform the act (not the intention of any final consequence out of that act. Thus it is the act which is the end of the intention to perform the act and not the final consequence is the final end of the intention to perform the act.).
Concise law dictionary defines rashness as:
“hasty, impetuous; acting without due consideration or regard for consequences.”
It means that a rash act is the act which is intended by the person to perform, though fully aware of the consequences it may follow, but adopt an indifferent attitude towards the end result. Thus, though the final consequence is not intended only the performance of the act is intended, the act should be stopped due to its dangerous nature.
A simple and most common example of it is the reckless driving of vehicles in crowded market place. This act of driving is intended not to hurt anyone but due to merely for the sake of adventure and excitement. The driver is fully aware that someone may be seriously hurt but he is indifferent towards the result as he thinks that nothing such will happen. Thus if the death occurs due to this kind of act so whether it will be a mere negligence or careless attitude towards the final result of the act?
Section 304A is actually equating the death caused due to rashness with the death caused due to negligence, which is something unjustified.
It cannot be doubted that death caused under 304A is also one of the specie of the genus culpable homicide. However it will neither come under culpable homicide amounting to murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder just because of the inclusion of the phrase “not amounting to culpable homicide” in the provision.
