Mens rea, a guilty mind. See ACTUS NON FACIT REUM, NISI MENS SIT REA. Although prima facie and as a general rule there must be a mind at fault before there can be a crime, it is not an inflexible rule, and a statute may relate to such a subject-matter and may be so framed as to make an act criminal, whether there has been any intention to break the law or otherwise to do wrong or not. There is a large body of municipal law at the present day which is so conceived. Bye-laws are constantly made regulating the width of thoroughfares, the height of buildings, the thickness of walls and a variety of other matters necessary for the general welfare, health or commerce, and such bye-laws are enforced by the sanctions of penalties; the breach of them constitutes an offence and is a criminal matter.... and in such a case the substance of the enactment is that a man shall take care that the statutory direction is obeyed and that if he fails to do so he does so at his peril--WILLS, J., R. v. Tolson, (1889) 23 QBD 173. See also BRETT, J., R. v. Prince, (1875) LR 2 CCR 163; Monsell Bros. Ltd. v. L. & N.W. Ry., (1917) 2 KB, and R. v. Wheate, (1921) 2 KB 119; Siviour v. Napolitano, (1931) 1 KB 636; Dobell v. Barber, (1931) 1 KB 219. As to what must be considered in deciding whether mens rea need be pursued, see Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. VI., No. 1, 1936, p. 1.
Mens rea is a state of mind under criminal law, which is considered as the 'guilty intention' and unless it is found that the 'accused' had the guilty intention to commit the 'crime' he cannot be held 'guilty' of committing the crime, Director of Enforcement v. M.C.T.M. Corporation (P) Ltd., AIR 1996 SC 1100 (1103): (1996) 2 SCC 471. [FERA, 1977, ss. 10 (1) and 23 (1) (a)]