India is one of the oldest civilizations with history talking about change in the legal regime of this country, whether it’s in terms of enactment or practices. One such significant recent development is switching over from the Indian Penal Code to Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, a new Criminal Law Code purported to modernise India’s dispensation of justice. The IPC, enacted as long ago as 1860, forms the backbone of India’s criminal laws to date; yet Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, introduced as recently as 2020, attempts to supplant it with more contemporary provisions.
What is pretty much of great interest in the IPC and BNS, however, is that in comparison to the murder punishment that comes under Section 302. From being a law student, legal professional, or just a reader, to understand how India refines its stand with one of the most serious crimes committed, which is murder, comparing Section 302 in the IPC and BNS assumes great importance.
Let’s jump into a comparison of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, with an emphasis on the key changes as well as nuance between the two.
A Brief Overview Comparison of Section 302 in IPC and BNS
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Criminal law bases its foundation from the IPC enacted in 1860. The section with relation to the punishment for murder from the IPC is section 302, wherein it is stated that a person who commits murder can be held liable for death or life imprisonment.
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code defines murder. According to it, the intentional killing of another human being is called murder. The law, however, clearly makes a differentiation between culpable homicide and murder, which it defines as a greater form of the former.
The intent is what matters here: that is the element the prosecution needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt to be true-the accused had a direct intention of causing death or harm likely to cause death.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 302
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which was introduced in 2020 and is proposed to replace the Indian Penal Code, thus introduces an oceanic change in India’s criminal law jurisprudence. Section 302 of the BNS continues the theme of murder but introduces some shifts in the consideration of punishment and intent in the context of homicide.
It retains provisions on the death penalty and life imprisonment but adopts a more culpable and aggravating circumstances approach towards defining murder. BNS introduces much greater clarity as to how mitigating factors-the mental state of the accused or the circumstances leading to the murder-should figure in sentencing decisions.
Comparison of Section 302 in IPC and BNS
Let’s let that general structure pass and now talk about what makes Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code unique from the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. These differences have arisen with changes in time when it comes to India and the nation’s stance on murder as well as how it tackles this crime.
Death Penalty or Life Imprisonment – A Balancer
Perhaps the biggest controversy that the IPC has brought upon itself is its practice of handing out capital punishment for murder. What is always a contentious element is that the provision by the IPC of the death sentence as the penalty in Section 302 for murder is considered unjust.
The BNS states that whereas in the Code, the penalty of death was retained there in, the emphasis there is more on the mitigating circumstances. For instance, under the BNS, it is upon the discretion of the judges whether there was actual provocation and if the murder was indeed such as one in self-defense or murder and other forms of heat of passion. Such factors may make it acceptable to pass on the capital punishment or may decide life imprisonment to be much more in order.
This eventually takes a step forward toward proportionate justice, wherein punishment does not only go in accordance with the crime but also with the circumstances in which the crime was committed.
Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
The IPC is clear regarding the definition of murder but does not go this far in distinguishing between different types of murder, such as premeditated versus impromptu killings. In general, all murders are pretty much treated alike, and punishment becomes a matter of judicial discretion.
However, the BNS is decidedly clearer and distinct. Not all murders are, after all, cut from the same cloth. The cold-blooded murder of a person for the sake of greed is quite different from a crime of passion. Hence, according to the BNS, courts are to take into account aggravating and mitigating circumstances, including the state of mind of the culprit, the nature of the crime, and whether there was anything abnormally gruesome or heinous about the manner in which the murder was committed.
This would define culpability better, to ensure that the punishment of murder meted out to an offender is not only done based on the outcome but also on their mental state and intent in doing so.
The Terminology of ‘Murder’ and ‘Culpable Homicide’
The IPC has long ago distinguished between the two convictions of culpable homicide and murder wherein murder is the graver charge. As defined under Section 299, IPC, culpable homicide has been defined as an act where the accused intends to cause death or has knowledge that his action would certainly cause death.
Whereas the BNS retains this distinction, it changes the nomenclature. The BNS specifically deals with intentional killings and provides for more accurate classifications of the nature of homicide. Even though culpable homicide is retained under the BNS, the distinction between murder and culpable homicide has been made far clearer and less ambiguous than before so that lawyers can easily understand thereby affording guidelines for judges to decide the charge to be preferred.
It is an important change because it ensures that crimes of lesser intent, like death with no premeditation, do not invite the same gruesome sentences as murder.
Reforming Function of the Judiciary and System of Sentencing
IPC has given judges enough discretion while deciding the sentence in a murder case. It’s not that easy as there are some guidelines that it goes by, yet, while deciding whether the crime warrants capital punishment or life imprisonment is always subjective.
Standardization of sentence: BNS tries to standardize sentencing so that judges can decide, while considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances, in more reasonable and better terms than before. In this process, it aims at a fair judicial process so that a consistent judicial process is observed, hereby curtailing the criticism over judicial arbitrariness in the past.
Judicial approach towards murder : These modifications matter to India’s approach towards murder and comprise striking and fundamental changes in their approach toward murder.
The changes ushered by the BNS reflect a larger trend in legal reforms in India. In keeping with an emphasis on proportionality in sentencing, mental states, and the different contexts in which homicide occurs, the BNS moves India closer to an approach that reflects modern sensibilities and human rights concerns.
While section 302 of the Indian Penal Code might be a law that came from a very different era; the law on section 302 of the BNS talks about murder under the more complex perspectives so justice could be rendered by providing a balance that has been meted out by the seriousness involved with which the offence occurred in the first place.
Specifically, it assumes importance in India in light of burgeoning legal consciousness and an evolving society. The BNS, therefore, aims to codify the criminal law in keeping with international standards while keeping the justice fair and proportionate.
Conclusion: A More Evolved Approach to Murder Laws
It can be seen that although Section 302 of the IPC may be very vague in intent, India’s legal system is expanding to eliminate the issues associated with modern-day crimes. BNS makes the approach more streamlined and clearer for providing punishment for murder, which gives importance to the issue of context, intent, or mitigating circumstances.
Where the IPC has been serving this country for more than 150 years, the BNS is coming along with much-needed reform in murder cases with clarity, fairness, and consistency.
Whereas reforms in criminal law or even legal reforms in India, the transition of IPC to BNS indeed is a very big move towards making it just and more modern system.