A) Details: Section 304 of the Bangladesh Penal Code deals with the offense of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It states that whoever causes the death of any person by doing an act with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
B) Punishment: Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description which may extend to ten years, and a fine.
C) Bailable or Non-bailable: Section 304 is a non-bailable offense.
D) Cognizable or non-cognizable offense: Section 304 is a cognizable offense.
E) Offence ingredients: The offense of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 requires the following ingredients to be established:
- The accused caused the death of a person.
- The act was done with the intention of causing death or causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.
F) What Needs to be Proved: In order to prove the offense under Section 304, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the victim, and that the accused intended to cause the death or bodily injury likely to cause death, or had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death.
F) Defence: The accused can claim the defense of accident, that the act of the deceased himself caused the death, or that the act was done in self-defense.
G) Top Case Laws:
- State Vs. Md. Razu (2005): In this case, the accused had assaulted the victim with a bamboo stick, causing his death. The accused claimed that he had acted in self-defense. The court found that the accused’s claim of self-defense was not believable, as he had used excessive force and had no injuries himself. The court convicted the accused under Section 304.
- State Vs. Mahbub (2010): In this case, the accused had hit the victim on the head with a brick, causing his death. The court found that the accused had the intention to cause death, and convicted him under Section 304.
- State Vs. Harun (2016): In this case, the accused had caused the death of the victim by stabbing him. The accused claimed that he had acted in self-defense, as the victim had attacked him first. The court found that the accused’s claim of self-defense was not believable, as the accused had used excessive force and had not sustained any injuries. The court convicted the accused under Section 304.
- State Vs. Abu Bakar (2018): In this case, the accused had caused the death of the victim by hitting him with a wooden plank. The court found that the accused had not intended to cause death, but had only intended to cause grievous bodily harm. The court convicted the accused under Section 304.
- State Vs. Mokles (2020): In this case, the accused had caused the death of the victim by hitting him with a machete. The accused claimed that he had acted in self-defense, as the victim had attacked him first. The court found that the accused had used excessive force and had not sustained any injuries, and convicted him under Section 304.
H) References: Bangladesh Penal Code, 1860; State Vs. Md. Razu (2005) 57 DLR (AD) 85; State Vs. Mahbub (2010)