CHAPTER - I

INTRODUCTION
Criminal law, also called penal law, refers to different jurisdictions of various bodies of rules
whose general characteristic is incomparable and often severe impositions as punishment for
failure to comply. Criminal punishment includes execution, loss of liberty, government
supervision (either parole or probation), or fines depending on the offense and jurisdiction.
Murder is one example of some of the archetypal crimes, but the acts that are prohibited are
not wholly consistent between different criminal codes, and even among a particular code
lines may be confused as civil infractions giving rise to criminal consequences as well.
Unlike civil law, this may be enforced by private parties, while criminal law is typically
enforced by the government.
Civil law, branch of law, dealing with disputes between organizations and/or individuals,
which compensation may be given to the victim. Civil law courts provide a confabulation for
deciding disputes involving torts (such as libel, accidents and negligence), contract disputes,
property disputes, the probate of wills, trusts, commercial law, administrative law, and other
private matters that involve private parties and organizations which include the government
departments. An action by an individual against the attorney general is a civil matter, but if
the state is represented by the attorney general or other agent from the state and takes action
against an individual, this is no longer civil law but instead this is now public law. Civil laws
objective differs from other type of law. Civil law attempts to right a wrong, settle a dispute,
or honour an agreement. The victim is being compensated by the person who is at fault; this
becomes a legal alternative to, or civilized form of, revenge. There is often a pie of division
and is allocated by the process of civil law, probably by invoking the doctrines of equity, in
cases of an equity matter.
Criminal lawsuits differ from civil lawsuits in that the criminal prosecutions are intended to
convict and punish the offender, while civil lawsuits are intended to settle disagreement
between private parties. The convicted defendant in criminal actions may be fined or may be
punished by imprisonment by the government. Whereas, in civil suits, the defendant who
losses to the plaintiff, must indemnify to the plaintiff directly. An action in criminal law does
not necessarily preclude an action in civil law in common law countries, and a mechanism for
compensation to the victims of crime may be provided. Civil Law determines private rights
and liabilities, whereas Criminal Law concerns offenses against the authority of the state.
Civil lawsuit includes plaintiff, the defendant, and possibly third parties. Plaintiff allegedly
suffered some legal wrongdoing at the hands of the defendant, the party that is responsible for
infringing upon the plaintiff's right. The plaintiff files a lawsuit against the defendant, the
court being used as the forum to argue that the defendant should be held responsible for the
plaintiff's injuries and should compensate the plaintiff for its losses. The parties in a criminal
lawsuit are different from those in a civil action. In criminal cases, the public, through the
authority of the state (or, if federal, the United States), brings the defendant (accused
criminal) to court to decide his or her guilt or innocence. Masses of citizens do not actually
1

haul defendants bodily into the courtroom. The government provides the special officer,
called the prosecutor or district attorney in many localities, who files criminal charges against
the defendant on the public's behalf instead. At the state level, this official might be called the
attorney general; at the federal tier, he or she would be the United States Attorney serving the
Department of Justice under the United States Attorney General.
The legal system is based on the common law and is divided into criminal law and civil law.
These two systems are distinctly different, but each is a system used to make a wrong a right
through a fair judicial process. In a civil law case, a private party, which might be an
individual, a company, or a corporation, files a lawsuit against the other party called the
plaintiff. In criminal law, the litigation is filed by the government by the office of the
prosecutor against the defendant.
Civil law, or continental law, is the predominant system of law worldwide, with its origins in
Roman law, and sets out a comprehensive system of rules, usually codified, which are applied
and interpreted by judges. Civil law became codified as local compilations of legal principles
that were recognized as reflecting the culture of the community. In civil law countries,
legislation is seen as the primary source of law. By default, courts thus base their judgments
on the provisions of codes and statutes, from which solutions in particular cases are to be
derived. Criminal law is concerned with protecting the citizens of a community from actions
that disturb the social order of that community, such as murder and assault. This body of law
provides a set of rules for peaceful, safe, and orderly living. People that break these laws can
be prosecuted, and if found guilty, could be fined or sent to prison, or both. Because criminal
law deals with protecting the community as a whole, the government is empowered to
enforce it.
In a criminal case, the federal, state, or municipal government brings the action in the name
of its citizens against a defendant who has been accused of committing a crime.
The people are represented by a prosecuting attorney such as the local county District
Attorney General, the Attorney General for a state, or the United States Attorney General.
The case proceeds to trial only if the defendant pleads not guilty. If the defendant pleads
guilty, there is no need for a trial to determine innocence or guilt.

PARTIES
2

In criminal law, the legal action which is also know as a suit, is initiated by the prosecutor
who decides whether to bring charges and what charges to bring.
A criminal law attorney represents a defendant who is being prosecuted by the state or federal
government for an act that has been classified as a crime. If he cannot afford an attorney, the
court appoints one free of charge, except in the case of certain minor offenses such as traffic
violations when the prosecutor is not seeking time in jail as punishment. This is unique to
criminal law in that the results of a conviction can lead to the loss of liberty. Civil law is
about private disputes between individuals or between individuals and organizations. Civil
matters include areas such as contract law, family law, tort law, property law, and labour law.
The person suing for a wrong has the burden of proving his case on a "balance of
probabilities." This means that a judge or jury must believe his story and evidence more than
the defendants version. They do not need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. One or
both parties can be represented by an attorney.

TESTIMONY
In a criminal case, the defendant is not required to testify and has the right to legal counsel.
Even if law enforcement agents simply want to question someone before any criminal
charges are filed, that person has the right to consult with an attorney before speaking to the
police.
In a criminal proceeding, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. The
defendant has the right to plead not guilty and be tried in a court. Even if the defendant is
guilty, the criminal law attorney might think that the evidence against the defendant is not
enough to prove the individual guilty. If this is the case, the defendant might have a better
chance going to trial.
In a civil case, anyone with knowledge of facts relevant to the case can generally be required
to testify as a witness in court, and any witness has a right to appear with an attorney.
In civil law, an attorney may demand information from the opposing party about any matter
that is relevant to the case, provided that information is not privileged. In civil law, an
attorney may properly demand information that would be inadmissible at trial, if such
demand appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
An attorney may even take the deposition of non-parties in a civil case, and require them to
bring documents with them. In civil law, an attorney may request documents or a visit inside
a building.
In a civil case, the defendant must be available and cooperative for depositions and
testimony as a witness in the trial. In fact, the defendant in a civil case in Federal court must
voluntarily provide his/her opponent with a copy of documents in the possession, custody, or
control of the party that are relevant to disputed facts alleged with particularity in the
pleadings." Further, the defendant in a civil case must voluntarily provide names of people
who are "likely to have discoverable information relevant to disputed facts alleged with
particularity in the pleadings." In other words, the defendant in a civil case must help his/her
opponent collect evidence that will defeat the defendant.
3

And, at trial, if a party invokes their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination,
then the judge will instruct the jury that they may make an adverse inference against the party
who refused to testify

BURDEN OF PROOF
The burden of proof in criminal law is completely on the state to prove its case. The state (the
prosecution) must prove that the defendant satisfies each element of the definition of a crime
and that his participation was beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant retains the
presumption of innocence until proven guilty by the state. The prosecutor in a criminal law
case must prove to the judge or jury "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the defendant is guilty
of the crime charged.
Although this does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt, it is a heavier burden of proof
than required in civil cases. At the end of a trial, the judge or jury can only find the defendant
guilty if they are left without a reasonable doubt about the defendants guilt. Civil and
criminal law may be further distinguished in terms of burdens of proof. In civil lawsuit, the
plaintiff's case must be affirmed by a preponderance of evidence, meaning the plaintiff must
persuade the judge or jury that his or her version of the facts is more likely than not and that
he or she is entitled to judgment. In some cases, such as those involving misrepresentation,
fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and probate contests, the plaintiff must
prove his or her case by clear and convincing evidence, which is a higher standard and more
difficult to meet that a mere preponderance.1
In contrast with criminal lawsuit the prosecutor must prove the case is beyond a reasonable
doubt. Meaning that judge or jury must believe the defendant's guilt without significant
reservations. This burden of proof is much more difficult than either of the proof levels
required in civil cases. This heavier burden on the government exists to protect defendants
from overzealous prosecutors who might succeed in convicting innocent individuals with less
evidence if the proof requirements were easier to satisfy.
Plaintiffs in a civil lawsuit need to show only by the weight or preponderance of the evidence
that a defendant is 51% or more liable (responsible) for the damages. This is a lower burden
of proof than in criminal law. The standard is what a reasonable and prudent man would have
done. The burden of proof begins with the plaintiff, and then the burden switches to the
defendant to rebut the plaintiffs evidence.
In civil law, the plaintiff wins if the preponderance of the evidence favours the plaintiff.
For example, if the jury believes that there is more than a 50% probability that the defendant
was negligent in causing the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff wins. A few tort claims (e.g., fraud)
require that plaintiff prove his/her case at a level of clear and convincing evidence, which is
a standard higher than preponderance, but less than beyond a reasonable doubt used in
criminal court."

1 Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra, 1977 AIR 183, 1977 SCR
(1) 763
4

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Civil litigation that deals with private disputes between parties is subject to the rules of civil
litigation, sometimes referred to as civil procedure. Criminal cases, deals with acts that are
offenses against society as a whole, such as murder and robbery, as subject to the rules for
criminal law, and is also known as the rules of criminal procedure.
Sometimes the same act results in both a civil and a criminal action. Example, suppose that
Faye Wood drives her car under the influence of alcohol. And then crushes into another
vehicle and injures the driver of that car, Bill Smith. Faye Wood would be arrested for the
crime of drunk driving, but Bill Smith might also sue civilly. The civil case (Smith vs. Wood)
will proceed according to the rules of civil procedure.
The government (in this case the state) would file an action against Faye Wood for the crime
of drunk driving as a criminal case. If she were found guilty, the court could send her to jail
or impose a fine payable to the state. While the civil case, Bill Smith would sue Faye Wood
for money to compensate him for his medical bills, his lost wages, and his pain and suffering.
The same act may spawn both a civil and a criminal case, but the two legal cases are always
kept separate. They will never be tried together. In part, this is because a different standard or
burden of proof is required in criminal case. The standard of evidence used to judge the
criminal case is higher than the standard applied in civil cases.

TYPES OF ACTIVITIES
Any act or failure to perform an act as designated by public law is considered a crime.
Most crimes consist of three elements: an act (actus reus), a mental state (mens rea), and the
intent to do social harm.
In a criminal case, the defendant is charged with a crime against society such as murder,
burglary, robbery, or theft. In criminal law, police generally must first obtain a search warrant
in a proceeding showing a "neutral and detached" magistrate that there is "probable cause,"
before searching or seizing items from a person's house.
Crimes classified as misdemeanours include less serious offenses that are normally
punishable by a fine, such as some traffic violations, petty theft, or possession of a small
amount of marijuana. Felonies include more serious offenses that warrant imprisonment of
one or more years, such as rape, grand theft, assault and battery, assault with a deadly
weapon, or homicide/murder.
Civil disputes usually involve some loss or injury to one party or his property. Unlike
criminal law; however, civil law is primarily involved with compensating victims. If a civil
action is successful, the defendant will be responsible for the wrongful action.
Although a defendant in a criminal case might be found guilty or not guilty, a defendant in a
civil case is said to be liable or not liable for damages.

Civil law offenses range from a breach of contract or warranty, the unlawful taking of
property, invasions of privacy, negligence, or intentional and unintentional infliction of
physical injury or emotional distress (personal injury) to severe rights violations such as gross
negligence, medical malpractice, and wrongful death.
In addition, civil law addresses the following:
PropertyBoundary disputes, trespass
Work-related disputesunfair dismissal, personal injury
Defamation of character
Consumer disputesFaulty goods, trades-description offenses
Copyright or intellectual property disputes

PENALTIES
In criminal law, the penalties include loss of liberty, which distinguishes it from civil law.
Penalties can be imposed as fines, imprisonment, and the ultimate loss of liberty, the death
penalty. Crimes are divided into misdemeanours, which are punishable by one year or less in
prison, whereas felonies are punished by imprisonment for one year or more up to life, or
death.
Criminal law is about punishing offenders and stopping them from doing it again. It is not
generally about dealing with individual rights that is the realm of civil law. Criminal law is
about protecting the community of citizens as a whole; however, the court might award the
victim compensation at the end of a case, if the defendant is found guilty.
A federal criminal conviction requires a unanimous decision by 12 jurors, or to be found
guilty by a judge if the defendant chooses not to have a jury. Should the defendant be
acquitted, the government has no right of appeal.
Because law believes the possibility of the loss of ones freedom is much more serious than
having to pay damages to a plaintiff, criminal litigation is a much more serious process than
civil litigation and gives criminal defendants more rights and protections than civil
defendants have.
In civil law, a guilty party cannot be imprisoned or executed. A party found guilty is usually
referred to as the losing party, and he will be required to reimburse the plaintiff the amount of
loss determined by the judge or jury that can include punitive damages.
It is important to realize that punitive damages cannot be awarded in a civil case that is
covered by contract law. In a civil case under tort law, there is a possibility of punitive
damages, if the defendant's conduct is egregious and had either 1.) a malicious intent (desire
to cause harm), 2.) Gross negligence (conscious indifference), or 3.) a wilful disregard for
the rights of others. The use of punitive damages makes a public example of the defendant
and supposedly deters future wrongful conduct by others. Punitive damages are particularly
important in torts involving invasion of privacy and civil rights, where the actual monetary
injury to plaintiff(s) may be small.

PROTECTIONS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION

Many of the protections that are available to defendants in a criminal case are not available in
civil law. For instance, the prohibition against double jeopardy applies only to criminal trials.
In civil litigation the concept is res judicata: you can only have one trial for issues coming
from one occurrence.

WHAT IS THE CIVIL LAW?

Civil law systems, also called continental or Romano-Germanic legal systems, are found on
all continents and cover about 60% of the world. They are based on concepts, categories, and
rules derived from Roman law, with some influence of canon law, sometimes largely
supplemented or modified by local custom or culture. The civil law tradition, though
secularized over the centuries and placing more focus on individual freedom, promotes
cooperation between human beings. In their technical, narrow sense, the words civil law
describe the law that pertains to persons, things, and relationships that develop among them,
excluding not only criminal law but also commercial law, labor law, etc.
What the civil law is:

A comprehensive system of rules and principles usually arranged in codes and easily
accessible to citizens and jurists.

A well organized system that favors cooperation, order, and predictability, based on a
logical and dynamic taxonomy developed from Roman law and reflected in the
structure of the codes.

An adaptable system, with civil codes avoiding excessive detail and containing
general clauses that permit adaptation to change.

A primarily legislative system, yet leaving room for the judiciary to adjust rules to
social change and new needs, by way of interpretation and creative jurisprudence.

Some salient features of the civil law:

Clear expression of rights and duties, so that remedies are self-evident.

Simplicity and accessibility to the citizen, at least in those jurisdictions where it is

codified.

Advance disclosure of rules, silence in the code to be filled based on equity, general
principles, and the spirit of the law.

Richly developed and to some extent transnational academic doctrine inspiring the
legislature and the judiciary.

Where we find the civil law:

In Continental Europe, where most jurisdictions have civil codes. In Great Britain,
Scotland has retained an uncodified form of the civil law. Even when they have civil
codes, Scandinavian countries are not regarded as civil law jurisdictions.

In North America, civil codes are found in Louisiana and Quebec.

In Central and South America, almost all countries have civil codes.

In Asia, many countries have received the civil law and have civil codes, such as
Indonesia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, and Lebanon.

Countries of Africa that once were colonized by continental European nations have
kept many aspects of the civil law traditions. The Civil Code of Egypt has a
significant influence in Africa and the Middle East, whilst the Roman-Dutch law
applied in South Africa was never codified.

Some remnants of the civil law traditions are to be found on some Pacific islands,
especially in the French territories of New Caledonia or Tahiti.

In mixed jurisdictions, chiefly found in America, Africa, and Asia, but also in
Europe, the civil law coexists with other legal traditions such as the common law,
customary law, or Islamic law.

WHAT IS CRIMINAL LAW?

Criminal Sanctions:
Criminal law is distinctive for the uniquely serious potential consequences of failure to abide
by its rules. In some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes death by capital punishment
may be imposed. Physical or corporal punishment may be imposed such as whipping or
caning, but these punishments are prohibited in much of the world.
Depending on the jurisdiction, individuals may be incarcerated in prison or jail in a variety of
conditions. Confinement may be solitary. Length of incarceration may vary from a day to life.
Government supervision may be imposed; including convicts may be required to conform to
particularized guidelines as part of a parole or probation regimen and, house arrest. Fines also
may be imposed, acquiring money or property from a person convicted of a crime.
There are five objectives that are widely accepted for the enforcement of the criminal law by
punishments: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation and restitution.
Elements of Criminal Law:

The criminal law generally prohibits undesirable acts. Thus, proof of a crime requires proof
of some act. The requirement of an actus reus or guilty act as the scholars label this. Some
crimes particularly modern regulatory offenses require no more, and they are known as
strict liability offenses. Because of the potentially severe consequences of criminal
conviction, judges at common law also sought proof of an intent to do some bad thing, the
mens rea or guilty mind. As to crimes of which both actus reus and mens rea are
requirements, judges have concluded that the elements must be present at precisely the same
moment and it is not enough that they occurred sequentially at different times.
Actus reus
A human being and an evil intent are not enough to constitute a crime. The criminal intent in
order to be punishable must become manifest in some voluntary act or omission. According
to Kenny, actus reus is such result of human conduct as the law seeks to prevent. The act
done or omitted must be an act forbidden or commanded by some law. Where the actus Reus
is a failure to act, there must be a duty. A duty can arise through contract, a voluntary
undertaking, a blood relation with whom one lives, and occasionally through one's official
position. It can also arise from one's own creation of a dangerous situation.
An actus reus may be nullified by an absence of causation. For example, a crime involves
harm to a person, the person's action must be but for cause and proximate cause of the harm.
Mens rea
Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea is a well known maim of criminal law. It means the
act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intentions were so. From this maxim follows
another proposition: actus me invito factus non est mens actus which means an act done
against my will is not my act at all. This means an act in order to be punishable at law must
be a willed act or a voluntary act and at the same time must have been done with a criminal
intent. The intent and the act both must concur to constitute the crime.2

Strict liability
The question whether a crime can be said to have been committed without the necessary
mens rea has led to considerable controversy. The broad principles accepted by courts in this
country as well as in England are: where an offence is created by a statute, it is usually
understood as silently requiring that the element of mens rea should be imported into the
definition of crime unless a contrary intention is expressed or implied.3

The O. J. Simpson case demonstrates both the criminal and civil law system. How can a
person be acquitted of murder in a criminal trial and then be held liable for a victim's
2 Fowler v. Padget, (1798) 7 T.R. 509
3 State of Gujarat v. D. arade, 1971 Cri. L.J. at p. 762
10

wrongful death in a civil trial? First, a criminal prosecution involves different laws, a
different court system, and different burdens of proof. Specifically, the definition of first
degree murder in the context of the O.J. case requires that the act be done deliberately and
with a great deal of malice directed toward the victim. And to convict in the criminal court,
the case against the defendant must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, in a civil case for wrongful death, the plaintiff has to show only that the defendant
was legally responsible for the death. To get punitive damages, as the plaintiffs did in the O.J.
case, you have to show that the defendant acted recklessly. The burden of proof in a civil case
is preponderance of the evidence, which is a much lower standard than is used in criminal
law. Such was the case for O. J. A civil jury found it more likely than not that he caused the
death of his wife and her friend. A criminal jury was unable to find beyond a reasonable
doubt that O.J. committed first-degree murder.

CHAPTER II
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Section 101 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Burden of proof.- Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or
liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts
exist. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of
proof lies on that person. Illustrations
(a) A desires a Court to give judgment that B shall be punished for a crime which A says B
has committed. A must prove that B has committed the crime.
(b) A desires a Court to give judgment that he is entitled to certain land in the possession of
B, by reason of facts which he asserts, and which B denies, to be true. A must prove the
existence of those facts.

11

CHAPTER III
JUDICIAL ANALYSIS

1. Rama Chandra Panda v. K. Dandapani Dorr4

In a suit for restraining defendants from entering upon disputed land and
interfering with cultivation of plaintiffs, the onus of proving acquisition of
permanent occupancy interest was on defendants who claimed that they had
acquired occupancy rights over suit land under Madras Act.
2. Mast Ram v. Dy. Commr. Bharaiah5
Once the defendant admits to have received the notice under Section 80 of
CPC, if the defendant alleges that the notice is not in accordance with Section
80, CPC, it is for him to show to the Court that it does not satisfy the
requirements of law.
3. Lakshmanna v. Venkateswarlu6
It has been held that when after the entire evidence is adduced the tribunal
feels it cannot make up its mind as to which of the versions is true, it will hold
4 ILR (1966) Cut 874
5 AIR 1968 All 321
6 Air 1949 PC 278
12

that the party on whom the burden lies has not discharged the burden, but if it
has on the evidence no difficulty in arriving at a definite conclusion, then the
burden of proof on the pleadings recedes into the background.
4. R. S. Joshi v. Ajit Mills Ltd.7
It has been observed that even here we may reject the notion that a penalty or
a unishment cannot be cast in the form of an absolute or no fault liability, but
must be preceded by mens rea. The classical view that no mens rea, no crime
has long ago been eroded and several laws in India and abrosd, especially
regarding economic crimes and departmental penalties, have created severe
punishment even where the offences have been defimned to exclude mens
rea.

CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION
In this assignment, we looked at a brief history of civil and common law covered the
difference in criminal and civil law in terms of testimony, parties involved types of activities,
burden of proof, and penalties. The concept of due process and protections under the
constitution were also addressed. In common law, civil law is the area of laws and justice
which affect individual legal status. Civil law, in this sense, is usually referred to in
comparison to criminal law, which is the body of law involving the state against individuals
(including legal persons such as corporations and Non-Profit Organisations, other than
physical human beings), where the state relies on power given by statutory law. Civil law can
be compared to military law, administrative law and constitutional law (the laws governing
the political and law making process), and international law. When there are legal options for
actions caused by individuals within any of these areas of law, it becomes civil law.
Criminal law is the body of law that relates to crime. It regulates social conduct and
proscribes threatening, harming, or otherwise endangering the health, safety, and moral
welfare of people. It includes the punishment of people who violate these laws. Criminal law

7 Air 1977 SC 2279

13

differs from civil law, whose emphasis is more on dispute resolution and victim
compensation than on punishment.

ANNEXURE

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Code of Criminal Procedure

Code of Criminal Procedure
Indian Penal Code
Indian Penal Code
Indian Penal Code
Google
7. Wikipedia

R. V. Kelkar
R. N. Saxena
S. N. Mishra
K. D. Gaur
Ratanlal Dhirajlal

14