Clause 8

A person is said to do an act intentionally where that person does an act deliberately.(2) A person is said to cause an effect intentionally where that person does anything that causes an effect —

with the purpose of causing that effect; or

knowing that that effect would be virtually certain (barring an unforeseen intervention) to result.(3) To avoid doubt, a person does not intend or foresee a result of his acts by reason only of it being a natural and probable consequence of those acts.(4) To avoid doubt, nothing in this section prevents a court from relying on a person’s foresight that a certain effect was a probable consequence of his act as a basis to draw an inference that the person caused that effect intentionally.Explanation.—Intention is distinct from motive or desire, and a person may do an act or cause an effect intentionally even if doing so was not his motive or he had no desire to do so. “Knowingly”26D.—

Whoever does an act with awareness that a circumstance exists, will exist, or is virtually certain (barring an unforeseen intervention) to exist, is said to do that act knowingly in respect of that circumstance.(2) Whoever does an act with awareness that an effect will be caused, or is virtually certain (barring an unforeseen intervention) to be caused, is said to do that act knowingly in respect of that effect.(3) Where doing an act knowingly is a fault element of an offence, that fault element is also established where that act is done intentionally. “Rashly”26E.—

Whoever does any act knowing that there is a real risk that a particular circumstance exists or will exist, and that it is unreasonable to take that real risk, is said to do that act rashly in respect of that particular circumstance.(2) Whoever does any act knowing that there is a real risk that an effect will be caused and that it is unreasonable to take that real risk is said to do that thing rashly in respect of that effect.(3) Where doing an act rashly is a fault element of an offence, that fault element is also established where that act is done intentionally or knowingly. “Negligently”26F.—

Whoever omits to do an act which a reasonable person would do, or does any act which a reasonable person would not do, is said to do so negligently.(2) Where doing an act negligently is a fault element of an offence, that fault element is also established where that act is done intentionally, knowingly or rashly. “Transferred fault”26G.—

This section applies to any offence under this Code or any other written law where a fault element of the offence is intention or knowledge, except where section 301(1) applies to that offence.(2) Where all the fault elements and physical elements of the offence have been proven in respect of an accused person, and assuming no defence or exception applies, the accused person shall be guilty of the offence despite the following circumstances:

the physical elements of the offence included the doing of an act or the causing of an effect concerning a person or thing;

at the time such act or effect was done or caused, the accused person believed or intended that the act or effect would concern a person or thing different from the person or thing mentioned in paragraph (a).(3) Subsection (2) applies only where the accused person did or caused the physical elements in subsection (2)(a) negligently in respect of the person or thing mentioned in that subsection.Illustrations(a) A throws a stone at B intending to hurt B (but not intending, knowing or having reason to believe that anyone else would be hurt), but the stone hurts C. A commits an offence of voluntarily causing hurt in respect of C if A threw the stone negligently in respect of C.(b) A throws a stone at a porcelain vase intending to cause loss to its owner, B (but not intending or knowing it likely that A would cause wrongful loss or damage in respect of any other property), but the stone damages a clay pot belonging to C. A commits mischief in respect of C if A threw the stone negligently in respect of C.(c) A threatens injury to B’s person by shouting at B the words, “B, I will kill you”, with intent to cause alarm to B. C hears these words and is alarmed. A does not commit the offence of criminal intimidation against C as A did not threaten C with any injury.(4) To avoid doubt, nothing in this section affects the requirement to prove all the fault elements of an offence in order for guilt to be established for that offence.Illustrations(a) A throws a stone at B intending to hurt B (but not intending or not knowing that A is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage in respect of any property), but the stone hits a porcelain vase. A does not commit mischief in respect of the vase. This is because A did not possess the fault element required to commit mischief.(b) A throws a stone at B intending to hurt B (but not intending, knowing or having reason to believe that anyone else would be hurt), but the stone hurts P, a police officer in discharge of his duty. A commits an offence of voluntarily causing hurt against P. A does not commit an offence of voluntarily causing hurt to P in the discharge of P’s duty as a public servant because A did not possess the fault element required to commit this offence.(c) A throws a stone at B intending to hurt B (but not intending or not knowing that A is likely to cause grievous hurt), but the stone causes grievous hurt to C. A commits an offence against C of voluntarily causing hurt where grievous hurt is caused under section 323A. A does not commit an offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt against C because A did not possess the fault element required to commit this offence.(5) Where the circumstances mentioned in subsection (2)(a) and (b) exist, the accused person may rely on any defence or exception in law as though the act or effect mentioned in subsection (2)(a) concerned the person or thing the accused person believed or intended that act or effect to concern.IllustrationA throws a stone at B in exercise of A’s right of private defence against B, but the stone hurts C. A may rely on the defence of private defence against B if A is charged for voluntarily causing hurt to C. “Strict liability”26H.—

An offence of strict liability under this Code or any written law is one where, for every physical element of the offence, there is no corresponding fault element.(2) Strict liability is said to apply to a particular physical element of an offence where there is no corresponding fault element for that physical element, regardless of whether or not the offence is one of strict liability.(3) To avoid doubt, an offence may be a strict liability offence even though it is not so expressly described by any written law; and strict liability may apply to a particular physical element of that offence even though it is not so expressly described in any written law.(4) It is a defence for any person charged with a strict liability offence to prove that in doing anything or omitting to do anything specified in the charge, he exercised reasonable care.”.