Viewing 0 reply threads
  • Author
    • #2778

      While researching about this, I came across the case of Ashiruddin Ahmed v. The King, under which the accused kills his son claiming that it was a command from Paradise. Ion this case, he was clearly aware of the nature of the act. However, the court of law held him to be not guilty. Since the accused went and narrated the entire incident to another person, he thought what he did was right. This implies that since he was of unsound mind, he was “acting under the delusion of his dream, believing the sacrifice to be right.” Hence even though he was aware of the nature but not wrongfulness, he is not liable.

Viewing 0 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Comments are closed.