Knowledge v/s Intention under Criminal Law
- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 5 months ago by .
- Topic
Sec 81 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 explains the general exception of necessity. The section says, “Nothing is an offence merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm, if it be done without any criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to person or property.” There are two key-words which point towards the mental state of the actor, under this provision – “knowledge” and “intention”. Clearly, the lawmakers used these two distinct terms to emphasize upon the degree of variation in the mental state.
Ques: What is the difference between “knowledge” and “intention” as per Sec 81 of IPC?
- Replies
Knowledge is defined as the state of being aware of consequences of the harm or injury incurred whereas intention conveys the state of mind of committing an act with the purpose and intent to cause such harm or injury.
Herein knowledge and intention could be differentiated by this simple illustration:
X is aware of the fact that fire may cause serious injury that means he is capable of understanding the fact and possess the knowledge of the consequences that would occur still he throws burning matchsticks on the passer-by, this statement directs that with the intent to cause harm he injures other people. This clarifies that the knowledge and intention both are present in the given scenario.
Section 81 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 states that the act likely to cause harm without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm which means the knowledge is available that it is likely to cause harm but the intention to do the act without criminal and guilty mind is necessary.
The act should either be done in good faith or under sheer necessity where the choice is to commit certain harm and to decide which one is the lesser harm to be done to avoid the greater harm that could not otherwise be avoided. This is the only way to avoid criminal responsibility in such cases.
The case where the captain of a ship in order to prevent the ship from wrecking into the boat with eight people on board on the right side and on another boat two people on board on the left side decides to crash into the boat with fewer people would be considered as a classic example of Section 81 under sheer necessity and in good faith to prevent the greater harm from happening by committing a lesser evil.
Here the knowledge of harming the two people on the other boat was clear to the captain, but in order to protect the lives of the other eight was an essential (good faith without criminal intent), so the exception to necessity can be applied here.
Though the delineate line between knowledge and intention is no doubt quite thin, but still it is not that difficult to common reasoning and understanding to distinguish the two.The term “Knowledge” refers to the ability to anticipate the consequences of one’s actions. For
instance, If X is aware of the swelling of Y’s intestines and any blows on them can cause severe
injury to Y, which leads to death. And on that part, the only X gives a blow to Y. Here X has
knowledge of the act he committed.
The first stage of crime is intention. The intention is the mental stage of crime. Intention to
commit a crime is seen from the act which a person commits. The act of giving poison to
someone indicates the person’s intention of killing another person. The overt act of an
individual will reveal his or her intention. Foreseeability of consequences is not enough to prove
intention. Desirability, as well as foreseeability, are necessary to constitute an intention. A
person’s intention can be determined by the circumstances and the use of the means, that
resulted in the criminal offense. There must be a prior intention to commit the act in order for
it to be considered a crime. An intention is a particular direction in which a person wants to
omit or commit an act prohibited by law. Since it is difficult to prove the guilty mind of a person
or the intention, mere intention without any action is not punishable by law.Intention:
Intent means cognizant objective or a purpose. Thus, a person who commits a criminal act in which that person’s apprised objective or purpose is to involve in that particular act which the
law prohibits or to bring an unlawful result by that act. An intention is an action or purpose of the
crime. It is divisible into an immediate act and ulterior object. The intention is the result of motive. Intention in criminal law is always termed to be bad and evil. It has a vital role in
determining the question of criminal liability.
Knowledge:
Knowledge is defined as a state of mental realisation that causes the mind to receive passive
ideas and impressions on a particular thing. For example, if you are driving rashly on a busy road, you have the knowledge that it may cause an accident that can even lead to death. Thus we
can say that knowledge may or may not lead us to crime. The word may play an important role in this term. In IPC Section 307, it states about attempt to murder with intention or attempt to murder with knowledge. This section mentions that whoever does any act with such intention or
knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that particular act caused death, he would be held guilty for murder, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
