KSLU Solved Question Papers
Criminal Law I
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 4
2025 Jan (100 marks) Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 4 Criminal Law I 2025 Jan (100 marks) Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2025 Jan (100 marks) examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2025 Jan (100 marks) examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2025 Jan (100 marks) examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 13 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1Define crime. Explain difference between crime and tort.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: why crime is hard to define; the main approaches (a wrong against the public, a breach of a public law, a wrong the State alone can pardon); how Indian law defines an offence (section 2(24) of the Sanhita); the elements of a crime, with Nathulal on mens rea; what a tort is; a full table of differences between crime and tort, each explained; acts that are both, and where the line falls (Jacob Mathew, Ramaswamy Nadar, Jaswantrai Manilal Akhaney); the victim's place in a criminal case; a conclusion.
Why crime is hard to define
Everyone knows that murder and theft are crimes. But it is hard to find a single test that marks off every crime from every other wrong. Breaking a promise is wrong, yet it is not a crime. Driving without a licence harms no one in particular, yet it is an offence. So writers have defined crime in several ways, each catching part of the truth.
- A wrong against the public. Blackstone saw a crime as a breach of public rights and duties owed to the whole community. The harm falls on one person, but the community treats it as harm to itself.
- A breach of a public law. Another view defines crime as an act done or omitted in breach of a law that forbids or commands it, and that attaches a penalty.
- A wrong only the State can pardon. Kenny looked at the consequence. A crime is a wrong whose sanction is punishment, which no private person can remit, and which only the State can remit, if at all.
Each definition stresses a different feature. Put together, a crime is a wrong that the community treats as an attack on itself. The law forbids it, and the State answers it with punishment.
How Indian law defines it
No Indian statute defines "crime". The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 defines offence instead. Under section 2(24), an offence means "a thing made punishable by this Sanhita". In Chapter III and certain listed sections, it also covers things punishable under special or local laws.
So the Indian definition is legal, not moral. A thing is an offence because the law punishes it. Section 1(3) confirms this. Every person is "liable to punishment under this Sanhita and not otherwise" for acts or omissions contrary to it. Section 4 then lists the punishments. Compensation to the victim is not among them.
The elements of a crime
A crime usually has four elements.
- A human being under a legal duty, capable of being punished.
- Mens rea, a guilty mind, such as intention, knowledge or rashness.
- Actus reus, an act or illegal omission forbidden by law.
- Injury to another person or to society.
Facts. In Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1966 SC 43, decided on 22 March 1965, a dealer was prosecuted for storing foodgrains without a licence. He had applied for the licence, paid the fee and believed it would be granted.
Held. The Supreme Court acquitted him. Mens rea is an essential ingredient of a criminal offence, unless the statute expressly or by necessary implication excludes it.
Why it bears. The guilty mind is what usually separates a crime from a mere civil wrong. A tort can often be committed by carelessness alone, or even without fault.
What a tort is
A tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract or trust, for which the remedy is a claim for unliquidated damages. That means a sum fixed by the court, not agreed in advance. Negligence, nuisance, trespass, defamation and false imprisonment are torts. The duty broken is fixed by law and owed to persons generally. The injured person brings the case to get compensation.
Differences between crime and tort
| Point | Crime | Tort |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of the wrong | a public wrong, against society | a private wrong, against an individual |
| Who brings the case | the State, through a public prosecutor | the injured person, as plaintiff |
| Title of the case | State v. the accused | plaintiff v. defendant |
| Aim | to punish the offender | to compensate the victim |
| Point | Crime | Tort |
|---|---|---|
| Result | death, imprisonment, fine, forfeiture or community service | damages, injunction or other civil relief |
| Mental element | usually essential | often not needed; some liability is strict |
| Standard of proof | beyond reasonable doubt | preponderance of probabilities |
| Settlement | only if the offence is compoundable | the parties may settle at any time |
| Death of the wrongdoer | the prosecution ends | the claim may continue against his estate in many cases |
| Law and procedure | the Sanhita, and the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita | judge-made law of torts, and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 |
1. Public and private. In a crime, the community is treated as the victim, though one person suffers. That is why the case is titled State v. the accused, and the injured person is only a witness. In a tort, the injured person alone is wronged, and he alone decides whether to sue.
2. Punishment and compensation. A criminal court punishes. The fine goes to the State. A civil court compensates. The damages go to the plaintiff.
3. The guilty mind. Most crimes need intention, knowledge or rashness, as Nathulal holds. Many torts need only carelessness, and a few none at all.
4. Proof. A crime must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, because liberty is at stake. A tort needs only proof that the plaintiff's case is more probable. So a man acquitted of a crime may still be held liable in tort on the same facts.
5. Settlement. A plaintiff may give up his suit whenever he likes. Most offences cannot be settled. Only those listed as compoundable in section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 may be compounded, and some only with the court's permission.
When one act is both
The same act may be a crime and a tort at once. Assault, defamation, nuisance and trespass are examples. The victim may sue for damages, and the State may prosecute. The two cases are independent and answer different questions.
Often the line depends on the degree of fault or on the guilty mind.
Facts. In Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, AIR 2005 SC 3180, decided on 5 August 2005, a patient died when the oxygen cylinder connected to him was found empty. The doctor was prosecuted for causing death by negligence.
Held. Negligence in civil law and in criminal law differ. For criminal liability, the negligence must be gross, of a very high degree. Simple lack of care may be enough for damages, but not for a crime.
Facts. In Ramaswamy Nadar v. State of Madras, decided on 11 October 1957, the organiser of prize competitions failed to pay the prize winners.
Held. He was acquitted of misappropriation. The entry fees had lawfully become his, and a man "cannot be criminally liable for being reckless or unwise in carrying on his business". The winners' remedy lay in a civil suit.
Facts. In Jaswantrai Manilal Akhaney v. State of Bombay, AIR 1956 SC 575, a bank's managing director pledged securities that another bank had lodged with his bank, to raise a loan for his own bank.
Held. His conviction for criminal breach of trust was upheld. Whether the owner's remedy was a civil suit or a prosecution depended on whether there was mens rea and the other elements of the offence.
Why these bear. The three cases show how the line is drawn in practice. The same facts become a crime only when the law's added elements, such as gross fault or a dishonest mind, are present.
The victim's place
Because a crime is a public wrong, the victim does not control the case. But the law does not forget him. A criminal court may order compensation out of a fine, or directly, under section 395 of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Section 396 requires every State to have a victim compensation scheme. Even so, compensation is a side order in a criminal case. In a tort, it is the whole purpose.
Conclusion. A crime is a wrong that the community treats as an attack on itself, forbids by law, and punishes through the State. Indian law defines it as an offence, "a thing made punishable" by the Sanhita, usually needing a guilty mind, as Nathulal holds. A tort is a private civil wrong redressed by damages at the suit of the injured person. The two differ in nature, parties, aim, result, mental element, standard of proof and settlement. One act may be both. Jacob Mathew, Ramaswamy Nadar and Jaswantrai Manilal Akhaney show where the line falls. A wrong becomes a crime only when the law's extra elements, such as gross fault or a dishonest mind, are present.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 4 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.