“Specific intent requires decision to bring about the prohibited consequence as means or end.”
Mohan was asked to provide a breath specimen and became aggressive. He drove his car directly at a police officer who had to jump out of the way. He was charged with attempted murder.
What constitutes the specific intent required for attempted murder, and how should intent be defined and proved in criminal law.
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction, holding that specific intent requires proof that the defendant decided to bring about the prohibited consequence, whether as his means or end.
This case provided the foundational definition of intent in criminal law, distinguishing between intent and recklessness. It's fundamental for understanding mens rea requirements, particularly for serious offences requiring specific intent.
You're reading the free summary of R v Mohan. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Mohan [1976] QB 1
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.