Yesterday, Sr. Professor while
teaching in class, gave some useful learnings, which I wish to write here.
Somewhere, the discussion upon the “intent to do something” cropped up. He
explained the above with the following short story:
The intent to do something by the
convict is central to any award of punishment in the judiciary. He told, this is not a modern development, and
has been around since the olden times. A similar situation had come to Gautam
Buddha. He had two cases came up in front of him:
1) A dacoit with the intention to
murder and loot a person on his way, strangled him, and thinking he was dead,
left him unconscious there. Somehow, the victim survived, and demanded justice.
2) A Doctor while treating a
patient of the ulcer in stomach, as soon as he placed the knife on the stomach,
the patient died.
Whom to hang?
The intent of the doctor was not
to murder, in fact his intent was the noble cause of making the patient
healthier. But, the patient died. On the other hand, the intent of the dacoit
was to murder, however, the victim survived.
