You are on page 1of 6

Unit No.

Q. No. 12: Explain in detail the concept of Abetment.
Answer :- INTRODUCTION :- A crime may be committed
by one or more persons involved in crime then their
liability depends upon the extent of their participation.
Thus this rule of joint liability comes into existence. But
there is an important fact which is that the law has a
knowledge about the abettor, who has given help to
another in crime. This rule is very ancient and was applied
in Hindu Law also. In English Law, criminals are divided in
four categories, but in India there is only one distinction
between the doer and his helper who is known as abettor.
The crime of abetment come under section 107 to 120 of
the IPC. Section 107 defines abetment of a things and
section l08 defines about the abettor.
A person abets the doing of a thing by instigation :1. Instigate any person to do that things
2. By conspiracy.
3. By aids.
BY INSTIGATION ANY PERSON TO DO THAT THINGS :According to the first clause of section 107 a person abets
of thing that instigates any person to do that thing. A
person is said to instigate another when he incites, urges,
encourages, provokes, counsels, procures or command
him to do something.
misrepresentations or by wilful concealment of a material
fact, which he is bound to disclose, voluntary causes or

procures or attempts to cause or procures a thing to be

done, is said to instigate the doing of that things.
ILLUSTRATION :A Police Officer is authorised by a warrant from a court of
justice to apprehend Z. B knowing that fact and also that
C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z and thereby
intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by
instigation the apprehension of C.
Case : Gurbachan Singh v/s Sat Pal Singh, AIR- 1990
A newly wedded girl died of burns. The father of deceased
had stated in FIR that the deceased committed suicide
because of harassment and constant taunt for insufficient
dowry. It was held by the SC that the deceased had
committed suicide at the instigation of her husband and in
laws and it was not a case of accidental death.
The second clause of this section states that a person
abets the doing of a thing who engages with one or more
other persons in conspiracy for the doing of that thing. If
an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that
conspiracy and in order to doing of that thing then it is
called abetment by conspiracy. If an act or illegal omission
takes place in prurience of that conspiracy.
ILLUSTRATION :A concerts with B a plans for poisoning Z. It is agreed that
A shall administer the poison. B then explains the plan to
C mentioning that a third person is to administer the
poison, but without mentioning As name. C agrees to
procure the poison and deliver it to B for the purpose
explained A administers the poison and Z dies. Here A

and C have not conspired together, yet C has therefore

committed the offence and is liable for punishment.
A case : Rup Devi v/s State : 1955.
The deceased & his wife had strained relationship. The
wife had illicit intimacy with the accused. The deceased
was scheduled to go to Sadhu on a particular day. The
wife told the accused about this programme even though
she knew that the accused was waiting for the opportunity
to kill her husband and taking the opportunity he killed
him. It was held that the wife was not guilty of abetment
by conspiracy, even though her conduct was open to
The third clause of the section says that, A person abets
the doing of thing who intentionally aids by any act in the
illegal omission of the doing of that thing.
EXPLANATION :- Whoever either prior to or at the time of
the commission of an act does anything in order to
facilitate the commission of that act thereby facilitates the
commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.
ILLUSTRATION :- If the servant keeps the gate open of
the masters house so that thrives may enter and thieves
do not come, he cannot be held to have abetted the
commission of theft.
A case: Ram Kumar v/s State of H.P. 1995. The 19 years
old prosecutrix was taken to the police station by the
accused that kept watch over her husband while she was
raped by the co-accused. In this custodial rape the
accused turned deaf ears towards the cries of the

prosecutrix and did nothing to help her. The SC implied

abetment of the accused for abetment of rape.
A person can become an abettor in two
ways :1. When he abates the commission of an offence :
Example : Where he abets B to commit murder of Z.
Here A is an abettor.
2. When the abets the commission of an offence it is
committed by a person capable by law to commit an
offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of
the abettor.
Example : A abets B, a five year old child, to commit
murder of Z, he is still an abettor under the 2nd category
because even though the child will not be guilty of
anything by virtue of the protection given to him by section
82 of the IPC.
To define the abettor the explanation must be read as :EXLPLANATION No.1 :- The abetment of the illegal
omission of an act may amount to an offence although the
abettor may not himself be bound to do that act.
ILLUSTRATION :- A instigates B to murder C. B refuses
to do so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit murder.
Explanation No.2 :- To constitute the offence of abetment it
is not necessary that the particular act of abettor should be
ILLUSTRATION :- A instigates B to Murder D. B in
pursuance of the instigation stabs D. D recovers from
wound. A is guilty of instigation B to commit murder.

Explanation No. 3 :- It is not necessary that the abettor &

the person abetted must have same guilty intention or
ILLUSTRATION :- A with a guilty intention, abets a child
or a lunatic to commit an act which would be an offence if
committed by a person capable by law lof committing an
offence and having the same intention as A. Here A,
whether the act be committed or not is guilty of abetting an
EXPLANATION NO. 4 :-The abetment of an offence being
an offence the abetment of such an abetment is also an
ILLUSTRATION :- A instigates B to instigate C to murder
Z. B accordingly instigates C to murder Z and C commits
that offence in consequences of Bs instigation. B is liable
to be punished for his offence with the punishment for
murder and as A instigated B to committed the offence. A
is liable to the same punishment.
EXPLANATION NO 5 ;-It is not necessary to the
commission of the offence of abetment by conspiracy that
the abettor shoulbigamyd concert the offence with the
person who commits it. It is sufficient if he engages in the
ILLUSTRATION : A concerts with B a plan of poisoning
Z. It is agreed that A shall administer the poison. B then
explains the plan to C mentioning that a third person is to
administer the poison but without mentioning As name C
agrees to procure the poison & deliver lit to B the purpose
of its being used in the matter explained. A administers
the poison, Z dies in consequence, Here though A and C
did not conspired together, Yet C has been engaged in the

conspiracy in pursuance of which Z had been murdered. C

has therefore committed the offence defined in the section
and is liable to the punishment of murder.