General Priniciples of Criminal Law

Only in these states is it possible to deal with lawbreakers effectively; in fact, a state's capacity to fulfil its primary duty of preserving peace in the land through the upholding of the law determines its identity. Upholding law and order is crucial for any society to allow people to live in harmony and without fear of harm coming to their lives, limbs, or property.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. What is Crime
2. General Principles In Criminal Law
3. Principles in Criminal Law
4. Elements of Criminal Law
5. Conclusion

Criminal law is a subset of public law that permits state punishment. The state is a party to criminal proceedings because crime is a wrong committed against individuals and society. Criminal law is limited to specific overt acts or omissions that can be conclusively proven to cause specific evils. Crime is defined as anything that the state has declared to be punishable by a legislative act.

What is Crime

A person who commits a wrong is said to be liable for it; criminal liability arises when a person commits a criminal act; a criminal offence is only committed when an act which is forbidden by law is done voluntarily. It is only voluntary acts which amount to offences. The Penal Code makes no definition of what constitutes a crime. It can be defined as an act of commission or omission, contrary to law, tending to the prejudice of a community, for which punishment can be inflicted as the result of judicial proceedings taken in the name of the State.

General Principles In Criminal Law

The General Principles in Criminal Law consists of the principles governing the criminal law in India. The General Principles of Criminal Law include principles like evidence, burden of proof etc. The fundamental tenet of our criminal justice system is that an individual, even if accused of a crime, is presumed innocent unless and unless proven guilty of the crime. The burden of proof for the magistrate, judge, or jury, depending on the situation, must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In cases where there is plausible doubt, the individual must be declared not guilty of the offence. A person charged does not automatically prove guilty; in fact, any discussion about the allegation should make it clear that the offence is merely alleged at this point.

Principles in Criminal Law

Burden of Proof

The prosecution's job is to establish the defendant's (the person facing an offence) guilt. The offence must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt for the defendant to be found guilty. It is not the defendant's responsibility to prove their innocence. This rule applies to all criminal trials, albeit occasionally the burden of proof for a particular defence argument rests with the defendant. For instance, the defendant is required to explain any offence that forbids a particular behaviour "without reasonable excuse," however it is the prosecution's responsibility to demonstrate that the excuse is not valid.

In certain situations, the defendant may bear the burden of proving a certain defence (like insanity), however, in those situations, the defence need only be established beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution must prove.

Evidence

The idea that a person is innocent unless and until proven guilty is the basis of criminal law. That's why the idea of proof is so important to criminal law. Without evidence, a scenario can only be a "he said/she said" one. Proof is the basis for establishing a fact.

However, the evidence must be analyzed from all directions. One can look at the same piece of information from several perspectives. It can also disregard the sections that come before or after. For instance, because text messages only convey a portion of the tale, they can be very challenging to use at times. Even while that story might benefit one side, there's a chance the rest of the story won't work out. The process of selecting which area to highlight always carries some risk.

Double Jeopardy

The double jeopardy rule, which governs criminal law, states that no one should face punishment for the same offence more than once and that no one should be twice put in danger of being found guilty. This means that someone who has already been accused, tried, and found not guilty of a crime cannot be accused of it again. Nonetheless, in many cases for instance, when an appeal court reverses a conviction or when the initial trial ends in a mistrial or a deadlocked jury a new trial is mandated.

Under certain conditions, double jeopardy is no longer applicable for major offences like murder, manslaughter, and aggravated rape according to changes made to the Criminal Procedure Act of 1921. A person may be retried for an offence for which they were previously found not guilty in one of two circumstances-

• Where new and strong evidence is presented that was not presented during the initial trial. This proof ought to be solid and trustworthy.

• Where it is demonstrated that the acquittal was "tainted." When someone is not found guilty of a crime because there was an error in the administration of justice, this is known as a tainted acquittal. If it is highly probable that the acquitted individual would have been found guilty had it not been for the administration of justice offence, charges may be brought against them.

Criminal Intent

It is rare for situations to be cut, as people frequently argue that their actions were justified by their degree of intoxication, poor mental health, or self-defence. On the other hand, intent describes the situation in which a person has a complete intention to carry out the crime or forbidden act and result in the consequences they did. For example, a person may have criminal intent to cause grievous bodily injury by hitting their victim in the head with a hammer.

Presumption of Innocence

Every person is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty, which implies that evidence must be presented to the court, tried, and examined before a verdict can be rendered. For this reason, a trial or hearing must occur before guilt can be declared.

That does not mean, however, that precautions do not need to be taken. Depending on the seriousness of the allegations, the court will need to exercise caution, which is why individuals are frequently subject to bail conditions or, in more severe cases, pre-trial terms of imprisonment. If there is a risk that could exist and endanger the safety of a person, a group, or the general public, action must be taken. The Magistrate or Jury will evaluate all of the evidence presented to them once the prosecution and defence have finished presenting their cases before deciding whether or not the accused is guilty.

Criminal Defences

As in any situation, there are a few various defences that people might try, and none of them is more likely to work than the others. The conventional defences of intoxication, self-defence, and mental health are typically relied upon by all criminals; nevertheless, you must be able to demonstrate the existence of those characteristics.

On the other hand, other defences might result from more incidental causes like errors, mishaps, false information, etc. You must consult a lawyer before relying on a defence so they can assess your prospects of success.

Right to Remain Silent

In general, one is not compelled to respond to inquiries from the police. There are a few exceptions to this rule, though. The primary exception is that a police officer has the right to request the name and address of anyone they witness committing a crime, someone they have reason to believe has committed or is about to commit a crime, or someone who could be able to help with an investigation into a crime or suspected crime. Under these conditions, it is illegal for someone to withhold their name and address or to provide a false address.

Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt

It is the prosecution's job to prove an offender's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to convict them of any offence or offences. A reasonable person is regarded as an average individual without any prior legal experience or education. Because the people evaluating the information can base their decision solely on what they have been told, this guarantees an unbiased decision is made.

The defence is going to have to show that the defendant could not have committed the crime for which they are being charged, or that there is reasonable doubt as to whether they could have. This process is carried out by the Supreme Court's jurisdiction, which subjects people to a jury of their peers. The unlawful act and the psychological aspect of having a guilty conscience or purpose are the two main elements required for a crime to take place.

Elements of Criminal Law

The unlawful act and the psychological aspect of having a guilty conscience or purpose are the two main elements required for a crime to take place. The prosecution must demonstrate the presence of both of these factors to establish that a person has committed an offence unless the offence falls into the rare category of a strict liability offense.

For instance, an assault occurs when someone assaults another without that person's consent, purposefully, and without a valid reason (like self-defence). Engaging in striking is prohibited conduct, and the desire to strike, harm, or injure someone is the mental aspect or culpable mindset.

Nonetheless, if an individual accidentally strikes another person, no offence is committed because there is no intent or mental element involved. But occasionally, someone may act carelessly that is, without a clear intention but ignoring or unconcerned with the results of their actions and commit an offence.

Strict Liability Offence

The exception to this rule is strict responsibility offences, which simply need the banned behaviour to be committed for an offense to be committed. In other words, no mental component is needed. Typically, violations of strict liability are of a minor regulatory character.

Attempts

Even if a person is unable to carry out the entire offence, they may still be held guilty of trying to do so. In a situation when an individual is charged with a completed offence but, based on the evidence, was unable to complete the offence, they may be judged guilty of an attempt or charged with attempting to commit an offence.

Conspiracy

It is possible to convict someone of conspiracy even if they haven't made any attempt at committing the crime. They may be prosecuted for this violation if there is evidence that more than one person planned a crime and that there was agreement among them to carry out a specific crime. For example, if a group of persons planned to rob a bank, they could still be charged with conspiracy even if the bank had not been selected.

Conclusion

This article describes the general principles of criminal law. The criminal law in India deals with offences that not only affect the individual but also hinder the peace of the society as a whole. The Criminal Law deals with the lawbreakers in a state and lays down the provisions to maintain law and order in the society and punish the offenders for the offences committed. The general principles of Criminal law as mentioned above include Burden of proof, Double Jeopardy, Evidence, Criminal intent, the presumption of innocence, criminal defence and the right to remain silent. These principles play a very important role in the working of the Criminal Law in India.