Dazed And Confused: Analysing Self-Induced Intoxication As A Defence To Crime
- IJLLR Journal
- Jun 12
- 1 min read
Niranjan S Nair, National Law School of India University
ABSTRACT
The defence of intoxication under Indian law, as enshrined in §23 and §24 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha (formerly §85 and §86 of the Indian Penal Code), remains ambiguous and inconsistently applied. This paper examines the historical evolution of intoxication laws in India, tracing their roots to British precedents like DPP v. Beard and DPP v. Majewski, and critiques the Indian judiciary’s reliance on Basdev v. State of Pepsu, which imposes a stringent burden of proof on the accused. The study highlights several notable ambiguities. These include the hazy line separating voluntary from involuntary intoxication, the disparate handling of various intoxicants, and the court's hesitancy to acquit on the grounds of intoxication due to social stigma. Ultimately, the paper advocates for a more nuanced and evidence- based approach to intoxication defences, free from moralistic prejudices, to ensure fairness in criminal liability assessments.
