269. Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease danger¬ous to life.—Whoever unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.

Negligence may be a tort or a crime. As described in the previous paragraphs, to establish the culpability of negligent act the existence of mental element is very essential. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Syed Akbar v. State of Karnataka has pointed out differences between negligence as a crime and a tort. The Apex Court has observed that, in criminal proceedings related to negligence, the persuasion of guilt must amount to such a moral certainty as convinces the mind of the Court beyond all reasonable doubt while considering the Court as a reasonable man. Further, where negligence is an essential ingredient of an offence, it is the duty of the prosecution to establish the culpability of negligence by proving it to be gross in nature.

Section 129 of the IPC This provision is under Chapter VI which deals with the offences against the State. The provision covers the negligent act of the public servant in causing the escape of a prisoner. The prisoner under this provision shall be a State prisoner or prisoner of war. The public servant who commits such negligent act shall be punished under this provision with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years and shall also be liable to fine. Therefore, the public servant is criminally liable for his negligent act.

Section 223 OF THE IPC This provision is covered under Chapter XI which deals with the offences of false evidence and offences against public justice. The provision imposes criminal liability on the public servant who is negligent in conducting his duty specified in the provision. Under this provision, the public servant who was legally bound to keep in confinement any person charged or convicted must have caused the escape of such person negligently. This provision covers all prisoners except those specific prisoners who are covered under Section 129 of IPC.

Section 225A of the IPC This provision criminalises the omission of legally bound duty by the public servant who omits such duty to apprehend or causes sufferance of escape. The provision considers both the intentional omission and omission caused by negligence. Therefore, the public servant is liable even if the omission of duty under this provision has occurred by negligence.