Abstract

State of mind is fundamental requisite for deciding culpability as well as quantum of punishment. Two similar acts can have different punishment even if the end result is same. A person can be imprisoned for life even if he could not commit the crime solely on the basis of requisite state of mind. A human conduct that is believed to be inimical to the social interests is labelled as a crime but the quantum punishment is decided by the mens rea i.e. culpable state of mind. Can we know the intention of the delinquent at the time of commission of crime? How to distinguish fake intention from projected one? We know already that truth cannot be ‘found’, and that it can only be reconstructed. In fact, Legal proceedings are not a simple recapitulation of a past occurrence. It is never possible simply to reconstruct the exact actions or utterances that gave rise to the case at hand. In such scenario, if there is misjudgement of intention, miscarriage of justice is bound to happen. This paper will discuss the method judges employ to judge the state of mind of accused while committing crime, are these methods full proof, and how to reduce the probability of misjudgement to advance the criminal justice.

Keywords