THE DECLINE OF MENS REA IN STRICT LIABILITY OFFENCES: IMPLICATIONS FOR CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

AUTHOR – SHIKHA MISHRA, LL.M (CRIMINAL LAW) AT AMITY INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED LEGAL STUDIES AMITY UNIVERSITY, NOIDA

BEST CITATION – SHIKHA MISHRA, THE DECLINE OF MENS REA IN STRICT LIABILITY OFFENCES: IMPLICATIONS FOR CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (3) OF 2026, PG. 884-886, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The principle of mens rea, or the guilty mind, has historically been the moral foundation of criminal liability. Rooted in the idea that one cannot be guilty without both a wrongful act and a guilty mind, criminal law traditionally required proof of both. However, the growing recognition and application of strict liability offences marks a significant shift from this foundational principle. In strict liability crimes, liability is imposed without needing to prove intent, knowledge, recklessness, or negligence. This paper critically examines the development of strict liability offences and their effects on the doctrine of mens rea. It analyzes whether these offences dilute criminal responsibility. Through doctrinal analysis, comparative law, and case law from India, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the paper argues that while strict liability serves essential regulatory and public welfare goals, its unchecked growth risks undermining fairness, moral responsibility, and the legitimacy of criminal law. The paper concludes by recommending a careful and principled use of strict liability, supported by safeguards to prevent the erosion of fundamental principles in criminal law.

KEYWORDS: Mens rea, Strict liability, Criminal responsibility, Public welfare offences, Moral culpability, Regulatory crimes, Criminal law, Fault principle 3