IPC Section 36
Text of Section 36 IPC:
“Wherever the causing of a certain effect, or an attempt to cause that effect, by an act or by an omission, is an offence, it is to be understood that the causing of that effect partly by an act and partly by an omission is the same offence.”
Explanation in Detail:
Section 36 of the IPC deals with situations where both an act (something done) and an omission (something not done) together result in a criminal effect.
This section clarifies that if an offence can be committed either by doing something (an act), or by failing to do something (an omission), then doing it partly by act and partly by omission is also considered committing the same offence.
Key Concepts:
Act: A physical action (e.g., hitting someone, giving poison).
Omission: Failing to perform a duty or expected action (e.g., not feeding a child, not providing medical care).
Combined Effect: If the harmful result (such as death, injury, etc.) occurs due to a combination of both, it is treated the same as if it happened purely through an act or purely through an omission.
Purpose of Section 36:
The law recognizes that harm can be caused not just by actions, but also by inaction, and sometimes by a combination of both. Section 36 ensures accountability in such cases.
Illustration (Example):
Imagine a situation:
A caregiver intentionally gives a child half the required dose of poison (this is an act), and then deliberately withholds food or water (this is an omission) that could have countered the poison's effects.
The child dies as a result.
Although neither the act nor the omission alone may have caused death, together they did. Under Section 36, this is treated as the same offence as causing death by act alone or omission alone.
Legal Implications:
This section helps courts attribute criminal liability in complex cases where both action and inaction play a role.
It removes ambiguity where an accused might argue they didn't fully cause the harm by action alone.
Application in Law:
It’s often applied in homicide cases, medical negligence, criminal breach of trust, and cases involving duty of care, where the offender had a responsibility to act but also committed a harmful act.
If you need real case examples or interpretations from court judgments, I can help with that too.
RELATED Blog
0 comments