SUBJECT:-CRIMINAL LAW (IPC)

NAME:- PARAS SEHGAL

ENROLLMENT NUMBER:-02819103819
SECTION:- BA LLB (SEM-3)
SUBMITTED TO:- ASHU MA’AM

Question:-State the different ways of abetment of an offence

and discuss the general rules of abetment. Also, distinguish
between the abetment and conspiracy
Answer:-
Abetment:-In common parlance, the word ‘abet‘ signifies help, co-activity and support and
incorporates within its ambit, illegitimate reason to commit the crime. So as to bring an
individual abetting the doing of a thing under any of the conditions specified under Section 107
of the Indian Penal Code, it isn’t just important to demonstrate that the individual who has
abetted has participated in the means of the transactions yet additionally has been associated
with those means of the transaction which are criminal.
Abetment is constituted by:

 Instigating a person to commit an offence; or

 Engaging in a conspiracy to commit it; or
 Intentionally aiding a person to commit it.
The offense of abetment by instigation relies on the intention of the individual who abets and
not upon the act which is finished by the individual who has abetted. The abetment might be by
instigation, connivance or purposeful aid as given under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code
However, the words articulated in an angry state or omission without any intention cannot be
termed as instigation.
For an individual to be called liable for Abetment, and so as to proceed against an individual for
a criminal offense under Section 107, prosecution must claim the component of mens rea.
Negligence or carelessness can’t be named to be abetment in order to punish the liable,
according to the arrangement of penal laws.

So as to establish abetment, the abettor must have appeared to “deliberately” support the
commission of the wrongdoing. In such a case we need to just prove that the wrongdoing
charged couldn’t have been done without the association as well as intervention of the
supposed abettor isn’t sufficient with the prerequisites of Section 107.
Punishment for abetment
In Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, the one who abets an offence is given the same
punishment as that of the principal perpetrator of the crime if the actus reus of the principal
offender has occurred as a result of the inducement made by the abettor. Section 109 of the
Penal Code is applicable in case no separate provision is made for the punishment of such an
abetment.

Section 109 of the Penal Code ends up being relevant regardless of whether the abettor is
absent when the offense abetted is committed given that he has instigated the commission of
the offense or has connected with at least one or more different people in a conspiracy to
commit an offense and in accordance with that conspiracy, some unlawful act or unlawful
exclusion happens or has purposefully helped the commission of an offense by an act or illicit
oversight.
Relevant Landmark Caselaws

 In the case of Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court has defined the
meaning of the word ‘abet’ in its jjudgement
 Jamuna Singh v. State of Bihar[ his was a case of abetment of fabrication of false
evidence. Accused pleaded that the fabrication had not taken place and hence he was
not guilty. Court held that the offence of abetment is complete when the alleged
abettor has instigated another or engaged with another in a conspiracy to commit the
offence. It is not necessary for the offence of abetment that the act abetted must be
committed
 Saju v. State of Kerala A young woman, Jameela, was found killed. At the time of her
death, the deceased was in advance stage of pregnancy. Upon trial the two accused
were found guilty of the offences of murder and abetment. The Supreme court held
that there is no direct evidence either regarding abetment or the criminal conspiracy
attributable to the appellant. Both the offences are held to be proved on the basis of
 circumstantial evidence. The court further held that to prove the charge of abetment,
the prosecution is required to prove that the abettor had instigated for the doing of a
particular thing or engaged with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy
for the doing of that thing or intentionally aided by an act of illegal omission, doing of
that thing. The prosecution failed to prove the existence of any of the ingredients of S.
107 IPC.

Difference between Abetment and Conspiracy

Definition Section 120A of the Indian According Section 107 of the

Penal Code defines Criminal Indian Penal Code, “A
Conspiracy as, “When two or person abets the doing of a
Criminal
more persons
Conspiracy
agree to do, or Abetment
thing, who –
cause to be done,
First - Instigates any person
(1) an illegal act, or to do that thing; or

(2) an act which is not illegal Secondly - Engages with one

by illegal means, such an
agreement is designated a
criminal conspiracy
or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for
the doing of that thing, if an
act or illegal omission takes
place in pursuance of that
conspiracy, and in order to
the doing of that thing; or

Thirdly - Intentionally aids,

by any act or illegal
omission, the doing of that
thing.
Example A and B made a plan to A, a public officer, is
murder C; letters passed authorized by a warrant
between them as to the from a Court of Justice to
movement of C. Here both A apprehend Z, B, knowing
and B are liable for that fact and also that C is
indictment to a charge of not Z, willfully represents to
criminal conspiracy under A that C is Z, and thereby
this section since there was intentionally causes A to
an agreement between A apprehend C. Here B abets
and B to do an illegal act, by instigation the
i.e., to commit the murder of apprehension of C.
C.
3 It is an Act or a Planning to
do an illegal act by all the
persons or any of them or by
some of them
4 Criminal conspiracy is a
substantive offence by itself,
and is punishable as such
5 Each accused is a principal
offender
Punishment Section 120 of the Indian
Penal Code prescribes
Punishment:
Whoever is a party to a
criminal conspiracy to
commit an offence
punishable with death,
imprisonment for life or
rigorous imprisonment for a
term of two years or
upwards, shall, where no
express provision is made in
this Code for the
punishment of such a
conspiracy, be punished in
the same manner as if he
had abetted such offence.
7 Conspiracy is cognizable or
non-cognizable, bailable or
non bailable.
It is an act to instigate or to
provide help to do an illegal
act by the person who is so
instigated
Abetment is not per se a
substantive offence.
Abettor is not a principle
offender
Whoever abets any offence
shall, if the act abetted is
committed in consequence
of the abetment, and no
express provision is made by
this Code for the
punishment of such
abetment, be punished with
the punishment provided for
the offence. (Section 109)
Cognizable or non-
cognizable, bailable or non
bailable