CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Notes  >  Doctrine of Transfer of Malice

Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT PDF Download

Introduction

The doctrine of transfer of malice is a legal principle recognized under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). It allows for the prosecution of an offender for harm caused to an unintended victim when the original intent was to harm a different person.

Section 301 of the IPC specifically addresses this doctrine.

Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT

What is the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice?

Definition:

  • The doctrine of transfer of malice, also known as the transmigration of malice, is a principle in criminal law where the intent to harm one person is transferred to an unintended victim if harm is caused to them instead.

Concept:

  • If an individual intends to commit a crime against one person but, in the process, unintentionally harms another, the criminal intent or malice directed at the intended target is legally transferred to the unintended victim.

Objective:

  • This principle ensures accountability for the unintended consequences of a person’s wrongful actions, holding them responsible even if the actual harm deviates from their original intention.

Illustration:

  • Suppose Z, with the intent to kill A, fires a gun but accidentally kills B instead. Under this doctrine, Z’s intent to kill A is transferred to B, making Z liable for B’s murder.

Section 301 of the IPC:

  • Culpable Homicide by Causing Death of a Person Other than the Intended Target: This section states that if a person causes the death of someone other than their intended victim, the culpable homicide committed is treated as if the intended victim had been killed.

Landmark Judgments

R v. Mitchell (1983):

  • In this case, the accused punched a man at a post office for questioning him about queue-jumping. The man fell onto an elderly woman in the queue, breaking her leg. The elderly woman later died from her injury.
  • The court applied the doctrine of transfer of malice, holding the accused liable for manslaughter.

Emperor v. Mushnooru Suryanarayana Murthy (1912):

  • The accused intended to poison a person named Appalla by giving him poisoned rice. While Appalla ate some, a relative’s daughter, Rajalakshmi, consumed the discarded portion of the poisoned food and died.
  • The Madras High Court convicted the accused for Rajalakshmi’s murder by applying the principle of transfer of malice.
The document Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT is a part of CLAT category.
All you need of CLAT at this link: CLAT

FAQs on Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT

1. What is the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice in criminal law?
Ans. The Doctrine of Transfer of Malice is a legal principle that applies when the intention to harm one person inadvertently results in harm to another. If a person intends to commit a crime against one individual but accidentally harms a different individual, the malice or intention is "transferred" to the actual victim. This means the perpetrator can still be held liable for the crime against the unintended victim.
2. How does the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice apply in cases of attempted murder?
Ans. In cases of attempted murder, if a person tries to kill someone but accidentally injures or kills another person, the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice allows the perpetrator to be charged with attempted murder of the intended victim. The malice or intent to kill is transferred to the actual victim, thus holding the perpetrator accountable for their actions, even though they did not directly target the victim.
3. Can the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice be used as a defense in court?
Ans. No, the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice is not a defense. Instead, it serves to establish liability for the unintended victim. The doctrine does not excuse the perpetrator's actions; rather, it allows the court to impose punishment based on the original intent to commit a crime, regardless of who was harmed in the process.
4. Are there any exceptions to the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice?
Ans. While the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice generally applies in various situations, exceptions may arise based on jurisdiction or specific circumstances of a case. For instance, if the act was purely accidental without any intention to cause harm, the doctrine may not be applicable. Courts may also consider other legal principles such as negligence or recklessness in these cases.
5. How does the Doctrine of Transfer of Malice differ from other legal doctrines, such as the "felony murder rule"?
Ans. The Doctrine of Transfer of Malice specifically addresses the transfer of intent from one victim to another when harm occurs accidentally. In contrast, the "felony murder rule" holds individuals liable for a murder that occurs during the commission of a dangerous felony, regardless of intent to kill. While both doctrines involve liability for unintended consequences, they apply in different contexts and under different circumstances.
Download as PDF

Top Courses for CLAT

Related Searches

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

mock tests for examination

,

Viva Questions

,

Semester Notes

,

MCQs

,

past year papers

,

Exam

,

pdf

,

Important questions

,

study material

,

Sample Paper

,

practice quizzes

,

video lectures

,

shortcuts and tricks

,

ppt

,

Summary

,

Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT

,

Objective type Questions

,

Extra Questions

,

Free

,

Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT

,

Doctrine of Transfer of Malice - CLAT

;