theoryofabrogation

The Empress vs Gonesh Dooley And Gopi Dooley 1879 Cal

The Empress vs Gonesh Dooley And Gopi Dooley 1879 Cal

(Snake Charmer’s Case)

JUDGMENT by McDonell, J.

Case Facts:
Gonesh Dooley was accused of causing the death of a boy by placing a snake on him by exhibiting in public a venomous snake, whose fangs he knew had not been extracted, and to show his own skill, but without any intention to cause harm to anyone, placed the snake on the head of one of the spectators. The spectator in trying to push off the snake was bitten, and died in consequence.

Issues Involved

Prosecution’s Argument: The prosecution argued that Gonesh intentionally caused the boy’s death by placing the snake on him, knowing it was dangerous. They also argued that Gopi abetted Gonesh by encouraging or assisting him in the act.

Defense’s Argument: The defense argued that Gonesh did not have the intention to kill the boy. They claimed it was a reckless act without the knowledge that it would result in death. They also argued that Gopi did not actively participate in the act and should not be held responsible.

Court’s Reasoning:

Courts Analysis: The court found that Gonesh did not intentionally cause the boy’s death. It was determined that he did not know the act was “so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death” (the last clause of murder)

Comparison with Previous Case: The court compared this case with another case The Queen v. Poonai Fattemah 1869, where the accused had intentionally caused a snake to bite the victim. The court noted that in Gonesh’s case, there was no such clear intention or knowledge of imminent danger.

Without intention but knowledge: Court observed that in this case “that Gonesh did not think that the snake would bite the boy. But we think that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death, but without the intention of causing death.”

Conclusion:
Sentencing: The court found that Gonesh did not have the intention to cause death but acted with the knowledge that his actions were likely to cause death. Therefore, he was sentenced under Section 304 Part II. Gonesh Dooley was sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment. Gopi Dooley, who abetted Gonesh, was sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment under Sections 114 and 304 of the IPC.

Criminal Law, Indian Penal Code, judiciary, Law

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *