UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

Research Paper in

LAW OF CRIMES

CLAW 206

Submitted by:

ABISHEK JAMES

REGISTRATION NUMBER: 200401427018

BBA-LLB

2020-2025

Submitted to:

AMIT BHASKAR

Alliance School of Law

Alliance University, Bengaluru

Date of Submission: 03/12/2021

 DECLARATION

I declare that the seminar paper entitled "UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY UNDER THE INDIAN
PENAL CODE " has been prepared by me and it is the original work carried out by me for
the fulfilment of the requirements of B.B.A LLB (Hons.) degree programme of School
of Law, Alliance University. No part of this seminar paper has already formed the basis for
any examination/evaluation requirement of any degree. 

Name of the Student: ABISHEK JAMES

Registration Number: 200401427018

Batch: 2020-2025 (III SEMESTER)

School of Law
Alliance University, Bengaluru.

DATE: 03/12/2021
 ABSTRACT

In this research paper discuss about the different aspects of unlawful assembly. The unlawful
assembly is introduced within the chapter of offences against public tranquillity. This chapter
has been divided into four parts, within this chapter unlawful assembly comes under the first
part.

Article 19(1)(b) of the constitution confers the fundamental right to assemble peacefully and
without arms. However, section 141 of the Indian Penal Code intent to criminalize unlawful
assembly.

In this paper, it is mainly going to focus on Unlawful assembly under the Indian Penal Code
and discuss the nature of liability of members of Unlawful assembly under the sections 141,
146, 148 and 149 of the Indian penal code 1860.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

1.1. Introduction
1.2. Research Objective
1.3. Literature Review
1.4. Research Methodology
2. Essentials of an Unlawful Assembly
3. Member of an Unlawful Assembly
4. Dispersal of an Unlawful Assembly
4.1 By use of civil force
4.2 By use of armed force
4.3 By certain armed forces officers in the absence of competent authority

5. Liability of members of an unlawful assembly

6. Case laws

7. Suggestions

8. Conclusion

9. Bibliography
1.1 INTRODUCTION

Unlawful assembly is stated under Chapter VIII of the Indian Penal Code. It consists of
offences against the public tranquillity. Unlawful assembly has been defined under section
141 of the Indian Penal Code. Composition 19 (1) (b) of the constitution confers the
abecedarian right to assemble peacefully, without arms. Still, the section 141 of the Indian
Penal Code aims to criminalize the unlawful assembly.

It's of utmost significance for a country to grow, develop and reach new heights of good
governance that its government should be suitable to offer its citizens a peaceful and healthy
terrain. Peace and more importantly, the belief that peace prevails, is essential to the actuality
of a cultivated society. Maintaining public order and icing tranquillity in public converse is
every government’s primary ideal. The lawmakers of our nation have taken estimable way to
save the public order and tranquillity among the people of society. The legal vittles’ relating
to public order and peace have been primarily elevated in the IPC.

An assembly may come unruly and may beget injury to individualities, property, or public
order. Such an unruly assembly is appertained to as an ‘unlawful assembly’. The top reason
why unlawful assembly is criminalized is to save the public peace and order. To discourage
people from committing crimes in groups, the Penal Code provides for vicarious
responsibility. Section141 reveals that the substance of an unlawful assembly is that five or
further people inclusively commit an offence.

1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research is to discuss the unlawful assembly under the Indian Penal
Code and to discuss the nature of liability of members of unlawful assembly.

1.To have a depth knowledge about the Unlawful Assembly under the Indian Penal Code.

2.To study the essentials of unlawful and the dispersal of Unlawful assembly.

3.To discuss the nature of liability of members of unlawful assembly.

4.To study and analyse the importance cases regarding the unlawful assembly.

1.3 LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Criminal law by PSA Pillai

PSA Pillai’s Criminal Law is one of the most archetypal text on the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
ever since the publication of its first edition in 1956. With a section wise content flow, this
work adopts an entirely different approach to the study of the law of crimes, focusing on both
emerging issues and the legislative developments. A leading treatise on the subject for over
five decades, this work, is a thematic presentation of complex and multi-dimensional subject
of criminal law in a lucid, comprehensive, and systematic manner. The book, primarily
concerned with the substantive offences incorporated in the Indian Penal Code, also explains
all the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872.

2. The Indian Penal Code by KK Gaur

The Indian Penal Code by Professor K.K. Gaur is a classic work in the field of criminal law
of outstanding merit, has been quoted with approval in the judgments of various courts,
including the Supreme Court of India and other countries. Unlike the traditional treatise in
criminal law, the unique feature of the book is that explores the untouched arena in criminal
jurisprudence dealing with nature and concept of crime and the scope of punishment under
the Indian Penal Code. The author briefly outlines the fundamentals of crime and criminal
law, principles of criminal liability, mens rea, vicarious and strict liability and discusses
elaborately every type of punishable offences including offences relating to human body.
Crime against women, bride burning and dowry related offences, suicide, torture and sexual
offences relating to rape, custodial rape, custodial violence, unnatural offences and sexual
harassment at workplace etc., in detail
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The research method that has been adapted is qualitative, in which the comparison of
different judiciary decisions and analytical methods are used for the research project.
Comparisons are done with respect to the various landmark cases and their judgments and
analytical method will come with an outcome of result done after research. This is a form of
doctrinal analysis and, thus, secondary research data is studied and critically analysed. In the
study titled “UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE”, the
doctrinal method was found to be the most appropriate. Qualitative data is used in this
research to demonstrate and explain the topic. In this explanatory research case studies are
also included.

Primary resources referred to the course of study include books, journals, law reports and
cases and other open sources like articles, journals etc. those were accessed through online.
2. ESSENTIALS OF AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

The main components of this section are that there has been an assembly of five or more
persons, and they have a common object, one of the five specified in this section must be this
common object. The ‘common object’ expression means that all the members of the assembly
should share and possess the object. There must be an ‘objective community. As section 141
there must be at least 5 members and should have any one or more than one common object
as mentioned above, to constitute an unlawful assembly. The essence of section 141 requires
5 persons and their common object. Being simply present with other members without any
common object does not amount to an unlawful assembly. The mere presence of any person
in an assembly without any common object does not make him the member of the unlawful
assembly.

In Bhanwar Singh v. the State of M.P.,1 the court held that the common object of an
unlawful assembly depends firstly on whether such object can be classified as one of those
described under section 141; secondly, such common object need not be the product of prior
concert but may form on spur of the moment, finally, nature of such common object is a
question of fact to be determined by considering the nature of arms, nature of assembly,
behaviour of members etc. The common object essentially to be examined keeping in view
the acts of the members and the surrounding circumstances of a particular case. Further, there
is always a possibility that an assembly may be turned to an unlawful one.

1. There must be an assembly of five people

In Dharam Pal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh2, the SC of India upheld that

“Where only five named persons have been charged with constituting an unlawful assembly
and one or more of them have been acquitted, the remaining accused (less than five) may not
be convicted as members of an unlawful assembly unless it is established that, in addition to
convicted persons, the unlawful assembly consisted of other persons who were not identified
and who were unable to be named.”
2. There must be a common object

The law does not declare a mere assembly of men, however large it may be, as illegal if it is
not inspired by an unlawful common object. “The court stated that “the word ‘object’ means
the purpose or design of doing a thing that is intended to be done in the case of Sheik Yusuf
v. Emperor3, and that the object must be ‘common’ to the individuals who make up the
assembly”. A common object is where all or at least five members of the assembly possess
one object and share it.

3. The common object must be to commit one of the five illegal objects specified in the
section

The object was specified as follows in section 141

a) To overawe government by criminal force

‘Overawe’ means creating fear in someone else’s mind. That is when, through the use of
force, a public procession tends to overpower government, like what the Stone Pelters do in
parts of Kashmir to protest against the government, such an assembly is called an illegal
assembly.

b) To resist the execution of law or legal process

Resistance by an assembly to a legal process or execution of law, for example, executing a

judgment or order of a court is subject to law enforcement, so restricting the arrest in the case
of Baba Ram Rahim in Haryana was an unlawful act by individuals and the government
decided to disperse the unlawful assembly pursuant to section 144 of the 1973 Code of
Criminal Procedure.

c)To commit an offence

Where an assembly of five or more persons having a common purpose of performing an act
that is prohibited by law or that constitutes an offence under the Indian Penal Code or other
special or local laws, such an assembly would be an unlawful one.
4. Possession and dispossession of property by force

Where an assembly uses a criminal force to deprive a person of the right to use water or any
other incorporeal right that the person enjoys and possesses or obtains possession of any
property or to impose such rights, those acts referred to above are prohibited under clause 4
of section 141 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

5. Unlawful compulsion

If the assembly compels them to carry an illegal act by using criminal force on others, it
would be an unlawful assembly.

3. MEMBER OF AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

The key component of the section 142 is that as soon as the individual knows the assembly is
unlawful, despite knowing that it is unlawful, it must be proved that he remained part of such
an assembly. The word ‘continues’ under section 142 means the physical presence as a
member of an unlawful assembly, that is, physically being present in the crowd. A person
who understands that the assembly is unlawful and is present as a just bystander cannot be
attributed to this chapter.
Section 144 aims to punish persons in an unlawful assembly armed with an offence weapon.
It prescribes the punishment of imprisonment for a term that can extend to 2 years, or fine, or
both. This section is intended to reduce the risk of hampering the tranquillity of the public.

IPC section 145 provides for punishment for knowingly joining an unlawful assembly that
has been ordered to disperse. This section is in consistent with IPC section151 and section
148. Section 151 deals with cases of a special nature in which disobedience leads to an
infringement of public peace, and section 188 deals with cases in which there is an
infringement of any legal order by any public servant. Section 129 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure provides that a police officer has special powers to order the dispersal of an
unlawful assembly.

Section 150 makes individuals who have been hired to join the unlawful assembly liable. It
provides that if a person is hired to be a member of an unlawful assembly, he is liable in the
same way as if he had been a member of that assembly and had committed the offence
himself. Section 157 of IPC is a broader section that provides for the harbouring of hired
individuals to be punished. Anyone who knowingly harbours the persons being hired as part
of an unlawful assembly shall be liable for imprisonment that may extend to six months, or
for fines, or both.

4. DISPERSAL OF AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

Under sections 129 to 131 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the power to disperse the
unlawful assembly can be exercised in three different ways

4.1 By use of civil force

Section 129 of the Code authorizes police officers and magistrates to order members of an
unlawful assembly or prospective unlawful assembly (assembly of persons likely to commit
any of the acts under section 141, IPC) to disperse and cease to violate public peace. Powers
shall be conferred primarily on any executive magistrate (including sub-divisional magistrate
and district magistrate) or officer in charge of a police station or any officer in his absence,
but not below the rank of sub-inspector, for the purposes of dispersing unlawful meetings.

Three prerequisites as mentioned in Karam Singh v. Hardayal Singh should be met before
any force can be used for dispersal of an unlawful assembly. First, an unlawful assembly for
the purpose of violence, or an assembly of five or more people likely to disturb public peace
and tranquillity, should be held. Secondly, it is ordered that such an assembly be dispersed by
the component authority immediately. Third, despite such dispersion order, such an assembly
does not disperse or ex facie, does not appear to be dispersing. The provisions of section 129
allow the use of only civil force, i.e., command, order, or warning, and therefore, in a
situation that did not justify the firing, the firing took place and that the State also ordered the
victim’s dependants to be compensated without the authority’s order.

4.2 By use of armed forces

In relation to the use of the nation’s armed forces to disperse the unlawful assembly, section
130 of the Cr.P.C. provides that if the Executive Magistrate believes that the unlawful
assembly cannot be dispersed using civil force and that its dispersion is necessary for public
security, it may cause the armed forces to disperse the assembly. The Magistrate may, with
the assistance of any group of persons belonging to any of three Armed Forces (the Army, the
Navy and the Air Force) and with such officers under his command, order the arrest and
detention of persons belonging to the three-Armed Forces. Clause 3, however, provides that
the armed forces and the commanding Magistrate should use as little force as necessary and
cause minimal injury to any person or property as possible.

4.3 By certain armed forces officers in the absence of competent authority

The provisions of section 131 shall apply only when public security is manifestly threatened
by the presence of an unlawful assembly and no magistrate may, in the circumstances
specified, be contacted. If these two conditions are satisfied, the forces under his command
may use any commissioned or gazette officer of the armed forces to disperse such an
unlawful assembly.
5. LIABILITY OF MEMBERS OF AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

Individuals who are charged with unlawful assembly are generally tried as a group. But
accused should always focus on getting his case separated then others so that he should not be
booked for deeds of another. The first course of action should be pursuing court for a separate
case. In the case of Garib Singh and others vs. State of Punjab (1973), Supreme court states
that “In the case of rioting and unlawful assemblies, where a number of men are accused, the
magistrate should deal with the case of each of the accused separately or discuss the evidence
against each of the accused, especially when the evidence against each of the accused is by
no means equally strong”.

Section 144 gives power to a District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate, or any other
Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the state government in this behalf to issue
orders in the case where he has sufficient ground to take action and for immediate prevention
or speedy remedy is desirable against the apprehended danger.

The object of section 144 is to pass an immediate order in advance to prevent any

apprehended danger or to immediately give a remedy in case of emergency. Preservation of
peace and tranquillity in society is the prime purpose of the state government; hence, the
government specially empowers executive magistrates under 144 to take immediate action in
case of emergency and to provide an immediate remedy in the following three situations
mention under clause 1 of section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure:

To Prevent.

1. Obstruction, annoyance, or injury to any person lawfully employed.

2. A danger to human life, health, or safety, or

 3.Disturbance of the public tranquillity or a riot or an affray.

The punishments are

i) Under Section 143 of I.P.C. whoever is a member of an unlawful assembly shall be

punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months,
or with fine, or with both.

ii) Under Section 144 of I.P.C. whoever joins unlawful assembly armed with a deadly
weapon which is likely to cause death; shall be punished with imprisonment for two years, or
fine or both.

iii) Under Section 145 of I.P.C. whoever joins or continue to be in unlawful assembly,

knowing it has been commanded to disperse, shall be punished with imprisonment for 2
years, or fine, or both.

iv) Under Section 149 of I.P.C. where an assembly commits an offence than every member of
that unlawful assembly, who knew such offence is likely to be committed, will be guilty of
that offence. And be punished for the term same as for the offence.

6. CASE LAWS

In Bhanwar Singh v. State of M.P., the court held that, on the one hand, the common
purpose of an unlawful assembly depends on whether that object can be classified as one of
the objects described in section 141; on the other hand, that common object does not have to
be the product of a previous concert but can form now. Finally, the nature of such a common
object is a matter of fact to be determined by considering the nature of the arms, the nature of
the assembly, the conduct of the members, etc. in essence, the common object to be examined
takes into account the acts of the members and the circumstances surrounding a particular
case. In addition, there is always the possibility that an assembly could be turned into an
unlawful one.

In the case of State of U.P v. Sughar Singh 5, five accused, with armed guns, were lying
in a bush on either side of a lane. When the deceased approached, he was exhorted by the
accused 4 and 5, and the accused 2,3 and 4, shot the deceased with their guns respectively.
1,2 and 3 of the accused threatened the witnesses. The trial court held that all these were
sufficient to conclude that these five accused constituted an unlawful assembly and that
members had a common object to kill the deceased. They had a prearranged plan. The trial
convicted the accused. The conviction was quashed by the high court upon appeal. The
conviction against the accused was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Moti Das v. State of Bihar6, the assembly, which was lawful to begin with, became unlawful
when one of the members called on the others to assault the victim and his associates, and all
the members of the assembly began to chase the victim while he was running in response to
his invitation.

Allaudin Mian Sharif Mian v. State of Bihar7, there is a relationship created between a
common object and an offence when the offence is committed with a common object, then
each person is liable for it.

Yunis alias Kariya, etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh8, eight accused were charged under
sections 302,147,148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code for criminal offences. During the trial
2 of the 8 accused had been released on temporary bail on various occasions. They did not
surrender and were unable to be arrested. Therefore, it had to be separated from their trial.
The remaining six accused have been tried and convicted of offences under IPC section
302/149. The court found that for conviction, the presence of the accused as part of the
unlawful assembly is sufficient. The fact that the accused was a member of an unlawful
assembly, and his presence was not disputed at the place of occurrence is sufficient to hold
him guilty even if he is not charged with any overt act.
Amar Singh v. State of Punjab 9, initially seven persons were charged for crimes pursuant to
sections 148 and 302/149, two of them were acquitted by the Sessions court and one by the
High Court, and no other person other than those seven was charged with the crime. The
Court held that, pursuant to section 148 or section 149, the convictions of the remaining four
cannot be upheld as a minimum of 5 persons are required for the application of these
sections. The acquittal of three accused persons and the remaining four accused cannot
therefore be convicted.

7. SUGGESTIONS

While the citizens fully exercise their constitutional rights, we cannot ignore the necessary
preconditions pertaining to the rightfulness of such exercise of rights, and the fact that they
are not absolute in nature. With a right comes a corresponding duty and sometimes
reasonable restrictions which are meant to protect the peace and security of the nation along
with maintaining the sanctity of these rights. Thus, ensuring that our freedom of expression
and right to form lawful assemblies do not contravene the ‘reasonable restrictions clause’
mentioned in Article 19(3) is also an integral duty of citizens. Determining whether an
assembly is lawful or when a lawful assembly turns into an unlawful one and establishing the
guilt and liabilities of the members involved are some basic components of the discussions
pertaining to assemblies and thus the proper interpretation of sections as per the
circumstances in a case has to be establish with due care.
While the citizens exercise their right to assemble peacefully or their right to protest in a
democracy, as secured under Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is
imperative to understand what exactly constitutes a lawful assembly and inclusion of what
elements render an assembly unlawful. An unlawful assembly refers to the mutual intent of a
group of people towards destruction of peace or posing a threat to the stability and security of
an area.
Section 141 of the Indian Penal Code which defines an unlawful assembly and lays down the
penal provisions is paramount to the understanding the of several array of debates and
deliberations that the concept of unlawful assembly and mass protests open up to, while
reflecting the principles of human rights linked to the various democratic principles, along
with establishing the balance between citizens’ rights and state’s control through the law
enforcement for the maintenance of peace and security.

8. CONCLUSION

Peace and tranquillity are very essential for the development of society. If there is
disorderliness in society or any other hindrance of like nature, the society cannot provide to
the individual, the opportunity to grow and develop to their full potential, hence the
maintenance of peace and tranquillity is a must for every society and a nation.

Every government’s main objective is to maintain public order and ensure tranquillity in
public discourse. Our nation’s lawmakers have taken commendable steps to safeguard public
order and tranquillity among the people of society. Peace is essential to the existence of a
civilized society, and more importantly, the belief that peace predominates. Preserving public
peace and order is the main reason why unlawful assembly is criminalized. The Penal Code
provides for vicarious responsibility to deter individuals from committing crimes in groups.
Being ‘knowingly’ part of the object of an unlawful assembly would render a person equally
responsible for punishment regardless of his role in the assembly.

9. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Criminal Law by PSA Pillai 14 th Edition (Referred on 25 th November 2021)

[2] Lawtimesjournal.in/offences-against-public-tranquillity (accessed on 26th
November,2021)

[3] Blog.pleaders.in/ipc-144/ (accessed on 26th November,2021)

[4] Lawtimesjournal.in/unlawful assembly/ (accessed on 27th November,2021)

[5] Legalbites.in/dispersal-unlawful-assembly-removal-of-public-nuisance/ (accessed on 28th

November,2021)