Bombay High Court

Reg v Govinda

(1877) ILR 1 Bom 34218771 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
The accused knocked his wife down, put a knee on her chest and struck her two or three violent blows on the face with his fist, causing extravasation of blood on the brain; she died.
Issue
Whether the offence was murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Held
Melvill J held it was culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The injury was likely to cause death but not sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The difference between S.299 and S.300 is one of degree of probability of death.
Principle
'Likely to cause death' is culpable homicide; 'sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death' is murder.
Cite this

Facts

  • The accused knocked his wife down, put a knee on her chest and struck her two or three violent blows on the face with his fist, causing extravasation of blood on the brain; she died.

Issue

  1. Whether the offence was murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Held

  • Melvill J held it was culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The injury was likely to cause death but not sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The difference between S.299 and S.300 is one of degree of probability of death.

Cite this

Citation

Reg v Govinda (1877) ILR 1 Bom 342

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/783074/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.