Skip to main content

Full text of "Medical Jurisprudence And Toxicology"

See other formats

402                                            MEDICAL JUEUSPRUDENCE.

the course of their judgment the House of Lords have laid down "that
evidence of drunkenness which renders the accused incapable of forming
the specific intent essential to constitute the crime should be taken into con-
sideration with the other facts proved in order to determine whether or not
he had this intent. Evidence of drunkenness falling short of a proved
incapacity in the accused to form the intent necessary to constitute the crime,
and merely establishing that his mind was affected by drink so that he more
readily gave way to some violent passion, does not rebut the presumption
that a man intends the natural consequences of his acts ". This observation
of Their Lordships has been followed in the cases in Indian courts and is
deemed as a final statement of the law on this point. In the case of King-
Emperor v, Bishan Singh53 where the accused was charged with having
murdered three persons by firing a gun in a state of intoxication, it was held
that the accused was not in such an advanced state of intoxication as not to
be fully aware of what he was doing and not to be perfectly cognizant of the
probable consequences of his act. When firing at the persons in question
he must at least be deemed to have intended to cause such injuries as he
knew were likely to result in death, and accordingly he must be held guilty
of murder within the terms of section 302, Indian Penal Code. In the case
of King-Emperor v. Judagi Maliafo,54 where the accused caused the death of
his cousin, Deonarain, by stabbing him on the throat with a knife in the
course of a drunken brawl, it was held that the accused was incapable by
reason of drunkenness to form the intent necessary to constitute the crime.
It was brought out in evidence that after he committed the crime he ran
about saying that he had killed this man and was going to be hanged. He
said that he had done a wrongful act. The accused had the knowledge and
the intention which would make him liable under section 302, Indian Penal
Code, and, therefore, he was guilty of murder.

Homicide under the Influence of Hypnotic Drugs.—In the case of
Rex v. Salkeld55 the defendant was indicted before Mr. Justice Humphreys
at the Birmingham Summer Assize, 1946, for the murder of a woman by
shooting her at a dance at Langborough. In evidence Salkeld said that he
had had a breakdown and had silly fits of weeping. He suffered from sleep-
lessness and took med.inal and other hypnotic tablets. After an absence of
feee hours the "Jury found the accused not guilty of murder, but guilty of
manslaughter. Passing sentence of five years* penal servitude _ the learned
Judge said he took it that the verdict meant that owing to Salkeld's drug-
taking -habit he was in a muddled condition of mind so that he was not in a
condition to form any intention to kill.

53.   Lahore Higfr Court Cr. App. No. 201 of 1929; 30 Grim. Law Jour., July 1929, p. 662,

54.   Patna High Cowrt peatfi Reference Case No. 8, 1929; 31 Criminal Law Journal]
March 1930, p. 243; see also Rangoon H. Court Cr. App. No. 1992 of 1933, K. E. v. Nga
§ehi Gule; 36 Cr. Law, Jour., .ISSSr p. -228-; Lafeo^e B^Gou**-Cr. Appeal-No: 495 of 1941;
K. E. v. Sammansingh Tkakc&smgK; 43 Cr. Low Jour., 1942, p. 33£/'        *

55.   Birmingham Postt July 18, 194&-     -   -                -