Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of offences affecting life
Section 300: Murder
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or— 2ndly.—If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused, or— 3rdly.—If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or— 4thly.—If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.
Illustrations
Exception 1.—When culpable homicide is not murder.—Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident. The above exception is subject to the following provisos:— First.—That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for killing or doing harm to any person. Secondly.—That the provocation is not given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant. Thirdly.—That the provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence.
Explanation.—Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to murder is a question of fact.
Illustrations
Exception 2.—Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, in the exercise in good faith of the right of private defence of person or property, exceeds the power given to him by law and causes the death of the person against whom he is exercising such right of defence without premeditation, and without any intention of doing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of such defence.
Illustration
Exception 3.—Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, being a public servant or aiding a public servant acting for the advancement of public justice, exceeds the powers given to him by law, and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith, believes to be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty as such public servant and without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused.
Exception 4.—Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender's having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
Explanation.—It is immaterial in such cases which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault.
Exception 5.—Culpable homicide is not murder when the person whose death is caused, being above the age of eighteen years, suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 300
-
Surender Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant could be convicted for an offence lesser than one punishable u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Maniklal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court committed any error in bringing the case within the ambit of “attempt to commit murder” punishable u/s.307 IPC on the ground that the deceased-R died after a period of nine months from the date of…
-
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned judgment relying on the confessional FIR filed by the appellant-accused himself and the medical evidence to uphold his conviction, however, altering it from s.302,…
-
Tukesh Singh & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh
Issue arose as regards the effect of the failure of the eyewitnesses to identify the accused in the court on the prosecution case.
-
Chunni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the accused at the time of commission of crime was incapable of making conscious and informed decision or was suffering from certain mental incapacity or unsoundness of mind; Whether a benefit of doubt may be…
-
Aslam alias Imran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting the accused-appellant u/s.302 IPC.
-
Firoz Khan Akbarkhan v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant u/s.302 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860 is justified; whether he is entitled to remission of sentence.
-
Sudam Prabhakar Achat v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose as to whether the conviction u/s.302 IPC could be converted into s.304 Part I or Part II IPC.
-
Yuvraj Laxmilal Kanther & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose as to whether the High Court was correct in dismissing the revision application filed by the appellants assailing the order of the trial court dismissing their discharge applications u/s.227 CrPC.
-
Ramesh A. Naika v. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka Etc.
Appellant-R, a bank manager, was convicted of murdering his two minor children, along with his sister-in-law and mother-in-law, in June 2010. His motive stemmed from disapproval of his sister-in-law’s relationship,…
-
Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc.
Whether the High Court committed any error in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Vijay @ Vijayakumar v. State Represented by Inspector of Police
Whether the appellant's act of causing the death of the deceased fell within the scope of "grave and sudden provocation" under Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Penal Code (IPC), thereby reducing the offence from…
-
Kunhimuhammed@Kunheethu v. The State of Kerala
Whether appellant had the intention to commit murder; whether the appellant’s act can be brought under section 304, IPC in light of the offence being committed in exercise of private defense and thereby exceeding the…
-
Suresh Chandra Tiwari & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
(a) Whether the circumstances relied by the prosecution have been proved beyond reasonable doubt; (b) whether those circumstances are of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; (c)…
-
Surender Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Correctness of the order of the High Court upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant for offences under ss. 302 and 307 IPC .
-
Anees v. The State Govt. of NCT
Murder of appellant-accused’s wife in their house in which the appellant, deceased and their 5 year old daughter lived. s.106, Evidence Act, 1872 was invoked and the appellant was convicted u/s.302, IPC for the murder.…
-
Manikandan v. State by the Inspector of Police
Matter pertains to the tutoring of the material witnesses by the police and its effect on the prosecution case.
-
Shailesh Kumar v. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)
What is the goal of investigation and what is the role of investigating officer; Are s.172 CrPC and ss. 145 & 161 of the Evidence Act to be read in consonance with each other; Can a General Diary entry precede the…
-
Dattatraya v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting the appellant u/ss. 302 and 316 IPC and sentencing to undergo life imprisonment and 10 years of R.I. respectively along with fine, for causing death of his wife as…
-
Mariappan v. State Rep. by Inspector of Police
On the day of incident, heated arguments took place between the two parties. During the quarrel, accused nos.1 and 2 stabbed victim multiple times with sooriknives, whil e accused no.3, though armed with a spade handle,…
-
Markash Jajara v. The State of Assam & Anr.
The appellant was held guilty of having committed the murder of his son-in-law. Whether the offence attributed to the appellant falls within the ambit of Exception I of Sect ion 300 IPC which defines “murder”.
-
Anil Kumar v. The State of Kerala
Whether in the circumstances of the instant case, the appellant had any premeditated mind to kill the deceased or was it due to grave and sudden provocation which would not amount to murder or would at best be a case of…
- Sunil v. State of NCT of Delhi
-
N. Ramkumar v. The State Rep. by Inspector
Appellant in fit of rage, dashed head of the victim against the wall, resulting in death of victim. Appellant convicted u/s. 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. Whether judgment, order and sentence…
-
Harilal Etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether the High Court was justified in upholding the order of the Sessions Judge convicting and sentencing the appellants to imprisonment for life u/s 302 IPC.
- No.15138812Y L/Nk Gursewak Singh v. Union of India
- Anbazhagan v. The State Represented by the
- Arvind Kumar v. State of Nct, Delhi
- Uggarsain v. The State of Haryana & Ors.
- Nagarathinam v. State Through the Inspector of
- Dakkata Balaram Reddy & Anr. v. State of Andhra
- Balu Sudam Khalde & Anr. v. The State of
- Premchand v. The State of Maharashtra
- Vahitha v. State of Tamil Nadu
- Prasad Pradhan & Anr. v. The State of
- Prakash Nayi @ Sen v. State of Goa
- Ranvir Singh Etc. Etc. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Prem Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Chherturam @ Chainu v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Dibaker Nunia & Anr. v. The State of Assam
- Dauvaram Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Ghulam Hassan Beigh v. Mohammad Maqbool Magrey & Ors.
- Ajmal v. The State of Kerala
- Major Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.
- Ex. Ct. Mahadev v. The Director General, Boarder Security Force & Ors.
- Jaswinder Singh (Dead) Through Legal Representative v. Navjot Singh Sidhu & Ors.
- Veerendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Mohd. Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Krishnamurthy @ Gunodu and Others v. State of Karnataka
- The State of Uttarakhand v. Sachendra Singh Rawat
- Jasdeep Singh @ Jassu v. State of Punjab
- Vinod Kumar v. Amritpal @ Chhotu & Ors.
- Arvind Kumar @ Nemichand & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
- Kala Singh @ Gurnam Singh v. State of Punjab
- Mohd. Rafiq @ Kallu v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Nagabhushan v. The State of Karnataka
- G H Khokan @ Khokhan Vishwas v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Shatrughna Baban Meshram v. State of Maharashtra
- Stalin v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
- Ilangovan v. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Inspector of Police
- Duleshwar & Anr. v. The State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh)
- Paul v. State of Kerala
- Suraj Jagannath Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra
- Awadhesh Kumar v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- The State of Arunachal Pradesh v. Ramchandra Rabidas @ Ratan Rabidas & Anr.
- Guru @ Gurubaran & Ors. v. State Rep. by Insp. of Police
- Khuman Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- R. Jayapal v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
- Rambir v. State of Nct, Delhi
- The State of Rajasthan v. Kanhaiya Lal
- Mani v. State of Kerala and Others
- Nandlal v. The State of Maharashtra
- Asif Khan v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokade v. The State of Maharashtra
- The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Suresh
- State of Rajasthan v. Leela Ram @ Leela Dhar
- Jangir Singh v. The State of Punjab
- Bhagirath v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Manoj Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Gurwinder Singh @ Sonu Etc. v. State of Punjab and Anr.
- Tularam v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Shakti Vahini v. Union of India and Others
- Atul Thakur v. State of Himachal Pradesh Etc. Etc.
- Surain Singh v. The State of Punjab
- Devendra Nath Srivastava v. State of U.P.
- Gandi Doddabasappa @ Gandhi Basavaraj v. State of Karnataka
- Arjun and Anr. Etc. Etc. v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Nidhi Kaim and Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
- Suresh Singhal v. State (Delhi Administration)
- Saddik @ Lalo Gulam Hussein Shaikh & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
- Brij Lal v. State of Rajasthan
- Prabhakar Vithal Gholve v. State of Maharashtra
- State of Rajasthan v. Ram Kailash Alias Ram Vilas
- Nankaunoo v. State of U.P.
- State of Assam v. Ramen Dowarah
- State of Rajasthan v. Ramesh
- M/S. K.C.P. Ltd. v. Government of A.P. & Ors.
- Ramanlal and Anr. v. State of Haryana
- Raj Singh v. State of Haryana Etc.
- Santosh S/O Shankar Pawar v. State of Maharashtra