Law prescribes consequences for its breach. We call such consequences liabilities to emphasise the element of force behind them. Liability is the bond of necessity that exists between the wrong-doer and the remedy of the wrong.
Image Source: images.flatworldknowledge.com
This remedy of the wrong is enforced by the supreme will of the State through the organised physical force of the State. There are many ways in which law compels a person to do an act which it is his duty to do or where it is not possible to do; it compels him to pay damages or compensation.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The severest form of legal liability is punishment; it is the consequence which a man has to suffer for committing a criminal wrong. A criminal wrong or an offence is an act or omission punishable at law. By law we mean law for the time being in force.
There are civil statutes which contain penal provisions, a breach of which is no less an offence than the breach of a criminal statute. Some crimes are crimes not because they are punishable, but they are punishable because they are crimes, because they are done with an evil and mischievous intention.
Crime and punishment are relative terms. There are certain faults which do not have guilty mind behind them but which the law makes punishable to make people cautious and careful about them. A person may be held guilty of negligence although he did not foresee the risk of harm.
He may be unjustifiably ignorant of some circumstances that increased the risk. In other words negligence means the absence of such care as it is the legal duty to use in any particular circumstance. It must, however, be noted that the test of responsibility for, negligence is not the same in criminal proceedings as in civil proceedings.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In civil proceedings, no question of mens rea arises, and the test of the defendant’s liability to make compensation is whether he did or omitted to do something which in the circumstances would not have been done or omitted by a reasonable man if by this standard his conduct was negligent, the fact that he acted to the best of his own judgment is no defence.
In criminal proceedings, on the other hand, the liability of the accused to punishment depends upon the existence of mens rea. To attract the penal provision for negligence it must be shown that the person was guilty of a very high degree of culpable negligence. Under the Indian Penal Code there are thirteen sections (Sections 279, 280, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 304-A, 336, 337 and 338) which deal with case of criminal negligence.
A crime is an offence, i.e., an act or omission punishable at law, which involves a guilty mind as one of its essential elements. There are different kinds of punishment ranging from death to warning, but unless a punishment in any form is inflicted for a wrong, it will not amount to an offence or a criminal wrong.
Fine resembles damages in that the wrong-doer pays a certain amount of money in both but it differs from damages in that it is a form of punishment which damages are not. If law awards punishment for a wrong such law is known as Criminal or Penal and if it provides any other remedy it is known as Civil law.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Traffic in human being or forced labour are offences today while slave trade and slave labour were legally permitted not long ago. We view them with a certain measure of moral adherence today and look upon them as crimes of a very low kind.
This conversion of a legal act into a crime is the result of a change in outlook. What is an offence or a crime is relative to prevailing ethics, juristic concepts and notions. Crime is not a static quality nor can it be considered in absolute terms.
There is actually no such thing as a crime by itself. The Indian Penal Code defines offences and describes penalties. It prescribes a number of criminal wrongs and prescribes their corresponding liabilities.
It applies equally to all persons in India who may be guilty for an act or omission contrary to its provisions (Section 2). The chief points of difference between a civil wrong and a crime may be noted down as under:
(1) Civil wrongs need only indemnification or compensation or payment of loss by the person who has done the wrong whereas crime is a wrong done which needs punishment to the wrong-doer by way of his reformation or to set a deterrent example so that it may not be repeated in future.
(2) The nature of the two wrongs being different the intention or ill-motive, is a consideration in cases of criminal wrongs but it is not relevant in adjudication of civil wrongs.
(3) Criminal wrongs are grave as they affect the public in general and as such they need greater indulgence but the cases of civil wrongs are private wrongs effecting only some individuals.
(4) Since both the wrongs are different in their spheres, the tribunals, procedure and burden of proof, also differ. In criminal wrongs burden of proof is generally on the prosecution but no such rule is laid down in respect of civil wrongs.
(5) So far compounding is concerned, a civil wrong can be compounded by the parties at any stage without seeking permission from the State or the Court but with regard to criminal wrongs the position is otherwise. Some wrongs cannot be compromised whereas some of them can be compromised with the permission of the Court and some of the criminal wrongs can be compounded freely.
In spite of these differences the same wrong may in certain circumstances amount to a civil wrong and in certain circumstances it may be a crime or it may also be both as for example, defamation, public nuisance etc. It all depends upon the circumstances attending to the wrong.