In cases where an act done is not an offence unless done with a particular knowledge or intent, a person who does the act in a state of intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if he had the same knowledge as he would have had if he had not been intoxicated, unless the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.
Simplified Explanation
Section 24 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), titled “Offence Requiring a Particular Intent or Knowledge Committed by One Who is Intoxicated,” addresses cases where an individual, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, commits an offense that requires specific intent or knowledge. This section clarifies the legal position when intoxication is involved in offenses that rely on an individual’s state of mind, and it distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary intoxication in determining criminal responsibility.
Key Points of Section 24
- Offenses Requiring Specific Intent or Knowledge:
- This section applies to offenses that require a particular state of mind, such as intent or knowledge. For example, crimes like theft, assault, or fraud generally require the individual to have a clear intention or understanding of their actions.
- Voluntary Intoxication and Criminal Responsibility:
- If a person voluntarily intoxicates themselves and then commits an offense requiring specific intent or knowledge, Section 24 holds them criminally responsible. Voluntary intoxication does not excuse their actions, as they chose to impair their faculties, and the law assumes that individuals should foresee the potential consequences of their voluntary intoxication.
- Involuntary Intoxication as a Defense:
- In cases of involuntary intoxication, such as when someone is unknowingly drugged, the defense may be allowed if it can be shown that the person lacked the required intent or knowledge due to the intoxication. This recognizes that the individual did not choose to impair their judgment and may not have been able to form the specific intent required for the offense.
- Assessment of Intent and Knowledge Under Intoxication:
- Courts examine whether the intoxicated state genuinely affected the person’s ability to form the intent or knowledge required for the crime. If voluntary intoxication is involved, courts may still hold the person liable, assuming that they could foresee the risk of losing control over their actions.
- Distinguishing Between Different Levels of Intoxication:
- Section 24 makes a clear distinction between voluntary and involuntary intoxication. While involuntary intoxication can serve as a defense, voluntary intoxication generally does not excuse criminal responsibility. However, courts may consider the level of intoxication in determining sentencing or the degree of liability.
- No Immunity for Crimes Committed Under Voluntary Intoxication:
- Voluntary intoxication does not protect individuals from being held accountable for offenses requiring intent or knowledge. This section emphasizes that choosing to become intoxicated does not relieve one from the legal consequences of actions taken while under the influence.
- Examples of Application:
- For instance, if someone voluntarily consumes alcohol and then commits theft, claiming they were too intoxicated to understand their actions, Section 24 would still hold them liable. However, if someone unknowingly consumes a drugged drink and, under its influence, performs an act that would otherwise require specific intent, they may be able to use involuntary intoxication as a defense.
Purpose of Section 24
The purpose of Section 24 is to reinforce accountability by clarifying that voluntary intoxication is not a defense for crimes requiring specific intent or knowledge. This section aims to deter individuals from using intoxication as an excuse for illegal actions, promoting personal responsibility for one’s choices and their consequences. At the same time, it acknowledges the fairness in allowing a defense for involuntary intoxication, recognizing that individuals who are unknowingly impaired may lack the capacity to form criminal intent. Overall, Section 24 balances justice and accountability, ensuring that intoxication does not become a means to escape liability while protecting those impaired against their will.
