In Croatia, whoever kills pregnant woman can be sentenced for aggravated murder; but the unborn child would not be victim. The victim in that case is a woman who was specially vulnerable to the crime during her pregnacy. That can apply to any situation, including DFV. Pregnancy itself is a basis for aggravated criminal offences of other kinds, as physical injuries, which can happen during DFV.

In England and Wales there is no specific offence of DFV but if the circumstances would amount to Homicide the the following is relevant:

In the Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 1994) (Case C408) the Court of Appeal held:-

(a) that murder or manslaughter could be committed where unlawful injury was deliberately inflicted to a child "in utero" or to a mother carrying a child "in utero" in such circumstances (ie where the child in utero was born alive and subsequently died because of the deliberately inflicted injury); and

(b) that the requisite intent to be proved in the case of murder was an intention to kill or cause really serious bodily harm to the mother.

However, further reference was made to the House of Lords which in July 1997 held:-

(a) the mother and the foetus were two distinct organisms living symbiotically: the foetus being unique as neither a distinct person from, nor an adjunct of the mother. Thus, murder could NOT be committed where unlawful injury was deliberately inflicted on a pregnant woman in circumstances where the child was subsequently born alive, enjoyed an existence independent of its mother and thereafter died; for in the present case in the absence of an intention on the part of the defendant to injure either the foetus or the child it would become, the necessary "mens rea" for murder was absent; the doctrine of transferred malice being inapplicable.

(b) Manslaughter, however, could be committed for the requisite "mens rea" could be proved where the intention was to do an act which was unlawful and which all sober and reasonable people would recognise as dangerous and likely to cause injury to another person. In the present case the defendant intended to stab the child's mother - an unlawful and dangerous act - it followed that, although the child was a foetus at that time, the requisite "mens rea" was established for on the grounds of public policy she was to be regarded as coming within that "mens rea" when she became a living person. Thus, provided the jury were satisfied as to causation, the crime of manslaughter could be committed despite the fact that the child's death was unintentional.

The reasoning of the House of Lords is difficult to follow especially as regards "transferred malice" to the foetus.

If a person intends to kill A but in fact kills B then the intention is to kill and the "mens rea" is sufficient for murder. Where a child was killed by an assassin who was aiming to kill the child's father, any suggestion that he was not guilty of murder would cause public outrage and justice would not be done by a conviction of attempted murder of the father and manslaughter of the child.

Fortunately, the circumstances surrounding the "transferred malice" to the foetus are exceptional. It was held that the defendant was guilty of manslaughter because he caused death by an unlawful and dangerous act. However, it was not merely an unlawful and dangerous act; it was done with the "mens rea" of murder. In the Attorney-General's reference two salient facts emerge:-

(a) The defendant caused the death of a person, the child. Otherwise he could not have been convicted of manslaughter.

(b) He did so by an act done with intent to cause grievous bodily harm to a person, the mother.

These two facts inevitably add up to the crime of murder.

Thanks everyone for your help. Much appreciated. 

 In India homicide is classified as culpable homicide - amounting to murder and not amounting to murder. Whoever kill  a pregnant women  charges of culpable homicide will be appicable. Section 316 IPC related to death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide which is not limited to domestic violence.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1184459/

http://www.aul.org/downloads/2016-Legislative-Guides/Legal-Recognition-of-the-Unborn/Crimes_Against_the_Unborn_Child_Act_-_2016_LG.pdf :

Section 3. Amendment of State Criminal Code.

For purposes of the offenses of homicide, assault, and battery [Designate the specific crime(s) and section(s) of the state criminal code to be amended], the term “person” [or other appropriate term(s) as used in the state’s criminal code] includes an unborn child at every stage of gestation from conception until live birth. -

Fetal Homicide State Laws:

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

http://www.aul.org/downloads/2016-Legislative-Guides/Legal-Recognition-of-the-Unborn/Crimes_Against_the_Unborn_Child_Act_-_2016_LG.pdf

Here are a few more updated links of information that may help you.

Also two links to  cases that involve domestic violence resulting in the death of an unborn child in each case both suspects were charged with capital murder. One in 2016 and another in 2017

2016: Man charged with capital murder in death of unborn child in Hoover

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/03/captil_murder_charge_in_death.html

2017: Birmingham man charged with capital murder in death of unborn baby; mom beaten with fists, belt

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/01/man_charged_with_capital_murde_4.html

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A03579&term=2017&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Text=Y&Committee%26nbspVotes=Y&Floor%26nbspVotes=Y

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ212/pdf/PLAW-108publ212.pdf

http://www.nrlc.org/federal/unbornvictims/keypointsuvva/

Hi Kate,

I understand that the criminal abortion law in the NZ Crimes Act 1961 has been used to convict when an unborn child has been killed due to domestic violence. The new government of NZ plans to repeal this part of the Act but is taking stock in order to ensure that the Act is still available for the purposes of conviction in the circumstances of domestic violence.

The law states:

Abortion

182Killing unborn child

(1)

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who causes the death of any child that has not become a human being in such a manner that he or she would have been guilty of murder if the child had become a human being.

(2)

No one is guilty of any offence who before or during the birth of any child causes its death by means employed in good faith for the preservation of the life of the mother.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM329352.html

Kind regards,

Alison Towns