COMMON INTENTION

Introduction

In the context of Indian criminal law, the terms "common intention" and "common object" refer to the shared
intent or objective of a group of people in committing a crime. These concepts are outlined in Section 34 and
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Section 34 of the IPC deals with "acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention." It states
that when a criminal act is committed by several people in furtherance of a common intention, each person is
liable for that act as if they had committed it themselves. This means that if two or more people plan to commit
a crime together and each one performs a specific role in carrying out the crime, they can all be held equally
responsible for the crime.
Section 149 of the IPC deals with "unlawful assembly." It states that when an offence is committed by a
member of an unlawful assembly, every member of that assembly can be held responsible for the offence if it
was committed in furtherance of the common object of the assembly. This means that if a group of people
come together with the intention of committing a crime, and one member of the group actually commits the
crime, all members of the group can be held responsible for the crime.
In both cases, the key element is the existence of a common intention or common object among the group
members. This means that they must have had a shared understanding and agreement about what they intended
to do and how they intended to do it. Without this shared intent, the principles of common intention and
common object do not apply.

Meaning of common intention

In the context of Indian Penal Code (IPC), "common intention" refers to an agreement between two or more
persons to commit a particular criminal act. It means that all the persons involved in the act had a shared
intention to commit the crime, and they acted together to accomplish that objective.
According to Section 34 of the IPC, when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the
common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by
him alone. This means that all the persons involved in the crime are equally responsible for the act, even if
only one person physically commits the crime, as long as it was done in furtherance of the common intention.
For example, if two persons plan to rob a bank, and one person carries out the robbery while the other keeps
a lookout outside, both will be held equally responsible for the crime because they had a common intention
to commit the robbery.

Who commits an offence in furtherance of common intention of all

In criminal law, when two or more people plan and agree to commit a crime, each person can be held liable
for the crime, even if they did not actually commit the act themselves. This legal principle is known as
"common intention" or "joint enterprise."
Under the principle of common intention, if one person in a group of offenders commits an offence in
furtherance of the common intention of all, then all members of the group can be held liable for that offence.
This means that if a group of people plan to commit a robbery, for example, and one member of the group
actually carries out the robbery, all members of the group can be charged and convicted for the offence.
It is important to note that for the principle of common intention to apply, there must be evidence that all
members of the group shared a common intention to commit the offence. This can be shown through the
actions, words, or behavior of the individuals involved.

Meaning of common object

In the context of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a "common object" refers to the shared intention or purpose of
a group of people who commit a criminal act together. Under Section 149 of the IPC, when an offence is
committed by a group of people with a common object, each member of the group is held liable for the
offence, regardless of whether they personally committed the act or not.
The common object is often described as the objective or aim that the group of individuals had in mind when
they came together to commit the criminal act. For instance, if a group of people come together to rob a bank,
their common object is the commission of the robbery. Similarly, if a group of people gather to assault
someone with the intention of causing harm, their common object is the commission of the assault.
The existence of a common object is a key element in establishing the guilt of each member of a group
involved in a criminal act. The prosecution must prove that the members of the group shared a common
intention or purpose to commit the offence. If the prosecution fails to establish the existence of a common
object, the individuals may only be held responsible for their individual acts, and not for the group's actions
as a whole.

Joint liability

The principle of joint liability under IPC (Indian Penal Code) refers to the legal principle that holds multiple
persons liable for a criminal offence committed by them jointly. This principle is also known as the principle
of common intention.
Under the principle of joint liability, all persons who are involved in the commission of a criminal offence
with a common intention are held equally responsible for the offence, regardless of the actual role played by
each person in the commission of the offence. This means that each person is held liable for the entire offence,
and not just for their individual contribution to it.
For example, if a group of persons plan and commit a robbery together, and one of them kills a person during
the robbery, all the persons involved in the robbery are held liable for the murder, even if they did not
personally kill the victim.
The principle of joint liability is derived from Section 34 of the IPC, which states that when a criminal act is
done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention, each person is liable for that act in the same
manner as if it were done by him alone.
In summary, the principle of joint liability under IPC holds all persons who act together with a common
intention equally responsible for the criminal offence committed by them, even if they did not individually
commit all the acts constituting the offence.

Difference between common intention and common object

Common intention and common object are two legal concepts that are often used interchangeably, but they
are different in meaning and application. Here are the key differences between the two concepts:

Meaning: Common intention refers to a shared understanding or agreement between two or more people to
commit a particular crime or unlawful act. Common object, on the other hand, refers to the purpose or
objective of a group of people who come together for a common cause.

Requirement: In order to establish common intention, it is necessary to show that there was a meeting of
minds between the accused persons to commit a specific crime. In contrast, in order to establish common
object, it is sufficient to show that the accused persons had a shared objective or purpose, without necessarily
having a specific plan or agreement.

Liability: In a criminal case, all members of a group who share a common intention to commit a crime are
held liable for that crime, regardless of who actually carried out the act. In contrast, in order to establish
liability for a common object, it is necessary to show that each accused person shared the common objective
and actively participated in its pursuit.

Examples: Common intention might be established in a case where a group of people plan and carry out a
bank robbery together. Common object might be established in a case where a group of people come together
to protest against a particular government policy, even if individual members of the group may have different
ideas about how to achieve their goal.

In summary, common intention and common object are distinct legal concepts that relate to different aspects
of group behavior and intent. Common intention requires a specific plan or agreement to commit a crime,
while common object relates to a shared objective or purpose.

Difference between common intention and similar intention

In Indian Penal Code (IPC), "common intention" and "similar intention" are two legal concepts that refer to
the state of mind or intention of two or more persons involved in a criminal act. Although they may seem
similar, there are some key differences between the two. Here are the differences between common intention
and similar intention under IPC point wise:
Definition: Common intention refers to a pre-arranged plan between two or more persons to commit a crime.
On the other hand, similar intention refers to a situation where two or more persons have a similar intention
to commit a crime, but there is no pre-arranged plan.

Presence of pre-arranged plan: In common intention, there is a pre-arranged plan to commit a crime. In
contrast, in similar intention, there is no pre-arranged plan.

Liability: Under common intention, all the persons involved in the criminal act are equally liable for the crime,
regardless of who actually committed the act. On the other hand, under similar intention, each person is only
liable for the specific criminal act that they committed.

Proving intention: In common intention, the prosecution needs to prove that there was a pre-arranged plan to
commit the crime, and that all the accused persons were aware of it. In contrast, in similar intention, the
prosecution only needs to prove that each person had the intention to commit the specific criminal act that
they committed.

Punishment: The punishment for common intention is the same for all the persons involved in the crime,
regardless of their actual role in committing the crime. On the other hand, in similar intention, each person is
punished based on their individual role in committing the crime.

Examples: A common intention can be seen in a situation where a group of persons plan to rob a bank together.
In contrast, a similar intention can be seen in a situation where two persons who do not know each other
decide separately to rob the same bank at the same time.

In summary, while common intention involves a pre-arranged plan to commit a crime and makes all involved
parties equally liable, similar intention refers to a situation where two or more persons have a similar intention
to commit a crime, but there is no pre-arranged plan, and each person is only liable for the specific criminal
act that they committed.

Conclusion