CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is ... Start Learning for Free
Principle:  Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.
Explanation: Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.
Facts: Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.
  • a)
    No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.
  • b)
    No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.
  • c)
    No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder  in the presence of all his mental faculties.
  • d)
    None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient f...
Mr. Roy was completely unaware of his actions since he was committing the offence of murder in his sleep, i.e. not in his conscious state. Therefore, there was no mensrea involved.
View all questions of this test
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.As per Section 107 IPC, a person is said to abet the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Explanations to this section state that a person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused.Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.Abetment is completely a separate and distinct offence from conspiracy. Most of the time, abetment is confused with conspiracy. However, abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or the act of intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. Whereas, in the cases of conspiracy, it would also involve the mental process entering into the doing of an act. The act of abetment could take place by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with can only be linked with the proven offence.The term instigate here denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action. In committing abetment, mens rea is a necessary ingredient. When a person provokes another to do an act prohibited by law, he is said to commit the offence of abetment by instigation.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence by conspiracy if he enters into an agreement with one or more persons to do an illegal act.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence if he intentionally provides assistance or gives aid by doing or omitting an act. Mere intention to provide assistance is not sufficient in these cases. To hold a person guilty and liable for abetment, there must be some active conduct on the part of the abettor and the act must be accomplished in furtherance of that.It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act without and beyond India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.Q. Nishas house was robbed by a group of robbers. The group of robbers included Prakash. The next day, Ramu, servant of Nisha, gave food and clothes to Prakash, an alleged offender, thinking him to be a beggar. Will Ramu be convicted for abetment for providing food and clothes to Prakash, an accused?

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.As per Section 107 IPC, a person is said to abet the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Explanations to this section state that a person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused.Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.Abetment is completely a separate and distinct offence from conspiracy. Most of the time, abetment is confused with conspiracy. However, abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or the act of intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. Whereas, in the cases of conspiracy, it would also involve the mental process entering into the doing of an act. The act of abetment could take place by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with can only be linked with the proven offence.The term instigate here denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action. In committing abetment, mens rea is a necessary ingredient. When a person provokes another to do an act prohibited by law, he is said to commit the offence of abetment by instigation.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence by conspiracy if he enters into an agreement with one or more persons to do an illegal act.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence if he intentionally provides assistance or gives aid by doing or omitting an act. Mere intention to provide assistance is not sufficient in these cases. To hold a person guilty and liable for abetment, there must be some active conduct on the part of the abettor and the act must be accomplished in furtherance of that.It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act without and beyond India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.Q. Sabya instigates Lovish to set fire to a dwelling house. Lovish, in consequence of the unsoundness of his mind, being incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he is doing what is wrong or contrary to law, sets fire to the house in consequence of Sabyas instigation. Sabya takes the defence of Lovishs unsoundness. Decide.

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.As per Section 107 IPC, a person is said to abet the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Explanations to this section state that a person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused.Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.Abetment is completely a separate and distinct offence from conspiracy. Most of the time, abetment is confused with conspiracy. However, abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or the act of intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. Whereas, in the cases of conspiracy, it would also involve the mental process entering into the doing of an act. The act of abetment could take place by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with can only be linked with the proven offence.The term instigate here denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action. In committing abetment, mens rea is a necessary ingredient. When a person provokes another to do an act prohibited by law, he is said to commit the offence of abetment by instigation.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence by conspiracy if he enters into an agreement with one or more persons to do an illegal act.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence if he intentionally provides assistance or gives aid by doing or omitting an act. Mere intention to provide assistance is not sufficient in these cases. To hold a person guilty and liable for abetment, there must be some active conduct on the part of the abettor and the act must be accomplished in furtherance of that.It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act without and beyond India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.Q.Aman, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend John. Raman, knowing that fact and also that Chetan is not John, willfully represents to Aman that Chetan is John, and thereby intentionally causes Aman to apprehend Chetan. Decide.

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.As per Section 107 IPC, a person is said to abet the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Explanations to this section state that a person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused.Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.Abetment is completely a separate and distinct offence from conspiracy. Most of the time, abetment is confused with conspiracy. However, abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or the act of intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. Whereas, in the cases of conspiracy, it would also involve the mental process entering into the doing of an act. The act of abetment could take place by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with can only be linked with the proven offence.The term instigate here denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action. In committing abetment, mens rea is a necessary ingredient. When a person provokes another to do an act prohibited by law, he is said to commit the offence of abetment by instigation.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence by conspiracy if he enters into an agreement with one or more persons to do an illegal act.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence if he intentionally provides assistance or gives aid by doing or omitting an act. Mere intention to provide assistance is not sufficient in these cases. To hold a person guilty and liable for abetment, there must be some active conduct on the part of the abettor and the act must be accomplished in furtherance of that.It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act without and beyond India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.Q. Shikha instigates Madan to murder Shubh. Madan in pursuance of the instigation stabs Shubh. Shubh recovers from the wound. Decide the liability and answer accordingly.

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.As per Section 107 IPC, a person is said to abet the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Explanations to this section state that a person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused.Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.Abetment is completely a separate and distinct offence from conspiracy. Most of the time, abetment is confused with conspiracy. However, abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or the act of intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. Whereas, in the cases of conspiracy, it would also involve the mental process entering into the doing of an act. The act of abetment could take place by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with can only be linked with the proven offence.The term instigate here denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action. In committing abetment, mens rea is a necessary ingredient. When a person provokes another to do an act prohibited by law, he is said to commit the offence of abetment by instigation.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence by conspiracy if he enters into an agreement with one or more persons to do an illegal act.A person is said to abet the commission of an offence if he intentionally provides assistance or gives aid by doing or omitting an act. Mere intention to provide assistance is not sufficient in these cases. To hold a person guilty and liable for abetment, there must be some active conduct on the part of the abettor and the act must be accomplished in furtherance of that.It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act without and beyond India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.Q. Siya, in India, instigates North, a foreigner in Pondicherry, to commit a murder in Pondicherry. Who would be held guilty?

Top Courses for CLAT

Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle: Mensrea, or the mental element is an essential ingredient for the commission of a crime.Explanation:Mensrea means that the offence must be committed knowingly and intentionally.Facts:Raghav Roy is a popular TV show host and an actor, who is famous in India for his acting talent and charismatic personality. One morning, Roy woke up next to his wife who had been brutally murdered with the help of a kitchen knife. Roy was extremely distressed and had to be admitted to a hospital for hysteria and panic attacks. When the police investigated his house, they found out through the CCTV cameras located at the kitchen that around 3 am the previous night, Mrs. Roy had entered the kitchen to drink a glass of water. A few seconds later, Mr. Roy followed her to the kitchen with a dazed expression on his face, picked up the knife and repeatedly stabbed his wife before dragging her body to their bedroom. It was later discovered that Mr. Roy suffered from a disease in which he acted as a person engaged in seemingly normal activities while he was sound asleep. Because of this condition, he was unaware of his actions during his state of slumber. Decide if the crime constituted sufficient mens rea to hold Mr. Roy liable for murder of his wife.a)No, since there is no established evidence which proves that Mr. Roy was actually asleep when he committed the murder of his wife.b)No, since Mr. Roy committed the act of murder of his wife knowingly and intentionally and cannot be excused under the law.c)No, since no such disease exists and hence, it proves that Mr. Roy must have committed the act of murder in the presence of all his mental faculties.d)None of the above.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev