Abetment in IPC
Introduction
A crime can be committed by a single person or a group of people. When a crime is committed by more than one person, each person's liability depends on their support of the crime. However, there are certain crimes that cannot be committed without the assistance of another person. If a person encourages or provides any type of assistance to someone to do an unlawful act, then the question arises as to what their liability will be. To deal with such cases, the concept of abetment comes into play. Chapter V (Sections 107-120) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with abetment and provides punishment for those who lend their support to the commission of a crime.
In simple terms, the word 'abetment' means to instigate a person to commit an offence under the law. It also includes instigating someone not to do something, the omission of which is an offence. Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides how abetment can be constituted. In this article, I will discuss the concept of abetment in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in simple language, avoiding technical terms.
Abetment Under Indian Penal Code, 1860
To constitute the offence of abetment, three main conditions must be met:
(a) There must be an abettor.
(b) The abettor must abet the act.
(c) The act which the abettor has abetted must be an offence.
Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that abetment may be constituted by:
(1) Instigating a person to commit an offence.
(2) Engaging in a conspiracy to commit an offence.
(3) Intentionally aiding a person to commit an offence.
A person is held liable for abetment based on their malicious intention. However, words uttered in a fit of anger without any malicious intention cannot be termed as abetment (Parveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal, 2012).
1. Abetment by Instigation
A person is said to abet another person when, by their words, gestures, or assistance, he provoke the other person to commit an act that is an offence under the law. Advice can also be considered as abetment if it actively suggests the commission of an offence. This can be better understood through the following example:
Example 1: A told B that they are going to kill C. B responded by saying, 'Do whatever you want, I do not care.' Later, A killed C. In this case, A cannot be held liable for abetment.
Example 2: A told B that they are going to kill C. B responded by saying, 'Shoot him in the head, and do not forget to take a picture of him.' Here, A is liable for abetment.
Explanation I of Section 107: The explanation of Section 107 provides that abetment can be committed by wilful misrepresentation of a fact. For example, X is a police officer authorized by the court to arrest Y. A, a person knowing that B is not Y, misrepresents B as Y. In this case, A is liable for abetment.
2. Abetment by Conspiracy
A person can be held liable for abetment if he enter into an agreement to do an act that is unlawful. For example, X, a servant, enters into an agreement with thieves that he will keep his master's house door open to make it easier for them to commit theft. In this case, X is liable for abetment.
In the case of R v Gotts (1992), the court held that a person can be held liable for abetment by conspiracy, even if he did not physically participate in the commission of the crime. If he encouraged or assisted in the commission of the crime, he can still be held liable.
3. Abetment by Aid
If a person intentionally aids another person to commit an offence, he is liable for abetment. However, there must be active conduct, and that conduct must lead to the commission of the offence. For instance, if A says to B that he is going to kill C, and B puts a knife in A's hand, then B is liable for abetment.
Aid can be provided through the commission of an act or the omission of an act. For example, if X, a police officer, knows that some people are going to kill B and keeps himself away from the place, he is liable for abetment.
Abettor - Section 108
Section 108 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, defines who an abettor is. A person is said to be an abettor if he abet:
(i) the commission of an offence, or
(ii) the commission of an offence which would be an offence if the person committing it were capable by law of committing an offence with that intention.
Explanation 1
If an omission by a public servant is punishable under the act, any person who is instigating such omission is liable for abetment. It does not matter that he is not liable for such omission.
Explanation 2
Abetment is not dependent upon the commission of the abetted crime. Explanation 2 to section 108 makes it clear that to constitute the offence of abetment, the commission of the offence is not necessary.
Explanation 3
If the person abetted is not capable of committing the crime, it does not mean that the abettor cannot be held liable for abetment. For example, X abetted B, a mentally retarded person, to commit a crime. Here, B may not be held liable, but X is liable for abetment.
Explanation 4
If a person abets another person to commit a crime, and that person further abets another person to commit that crime, then both abettors are liable for abetment.
Punishment for Abetment:
(I) Punishment for Abetment When No Express Provision is Made - Section 109
According to Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, if an offence is committed in pursuance of abetment and no specific provision is made, then the abettor will be punished with the same punishment as provided for the committed offence. There are three ingredients of Section 109:
(a) there must be abetment of an offence
(b) the abetted offence must be committed
(c) no specific provision is made for the abetment of such offence.
(II) Punishment for Abetment if Person Abetted Acts with Different Intention - Section 110
Section 110 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, provides that the intention of the abetted person does not matter. The abettor will be punished with the same punishment as is provided for the offence.
(III) Punishment for Abetment When Another Offence is Committed Other than the Abetted Offence - Section 111
Section 111 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, provides that if an abetted person commits an offence other than the abetted offence, then the abettor will be liable for that offence in the same manner as ha has abetted that offence. The proviso of Section 111 provides that the offence committed must be the probable consequence of the main abetted offence. For example:
(a) X instigates B, a child, to put poison in the food of K. B mistakenly puts the poison in the food of L. Here, putting poison in L's food is a probable consequence, and X is liable for abetment in the same manner as he is liable for abetment to put poison in the food of K.
(IV) Punishment of Abetment When Abetted Offence is Committed with Another Offence - Section 112
Section 112 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that when the abetted person commits the abetted offence as well as a different offence which is a probable consequence of the abetted offence, the abettor will be liable for abetment of both offences. This section supplements Section 111.
(V) Punishment of Abetment when Abettor was Present at the Commission of Offence - Section 114
Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that when the abettor is present at the place where the offence is committed, "he shall be deemed to have himself committed that offence." However, mere presence does not make him liable; he must give some assistance to commit the offence. Section 114 is based on the legal maxim "juris et de jure," which means:
Actual Presence + Prior abetment = Participation
(VI) Punishment of Abetment when Abetted Offence is Punishable with Death Penalty or Life Imprisonment - Section 115
Sections 109, 115, and 116 provide for the punishment of abetment when the offence abetted is not committed. Section 115 provides that whenever a person abets someone to do an act that is punishable with the death penalty or life imprisonment and the offence is not committed, he will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 7 years. He shall also be liable to a fine.
(VII) Punishment of Abetment when Abetted Offence is Punishable with Imprisonment - Section 116
Section 116 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that when a person abets someone to commit an offence which is punishable with imprisonment and the offence is not committed, then the abettor will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 1/4 of the longest imprisonment provided for that offence. For example:
(a) X offers a bribe to Y, a police officer, to show some favor in the dispute, but Y refuses to take the bribe. X is liable under this section.
(VIII) Punishment of Abetment for Abetting Public or More than 10 Persons - Section 117
Section 117 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that if a person abets the public or more than 10 persons, he shall be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 3 years or with a fine, or with both.
(IX) Punishment for Concealing Design to Commit Offence Punishable with Death Penalty or Life Imprisonment - Section 118
Section 118 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that if a person voluntarily conceals the design of an offence which is punishable with the death penalty or life imprisonment, he shall be liable for abetment. In this, there are two cases:
When the Offence is Committed - Then the person will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 7 years and also liable to pay a fine.
When the Offence is not Committed - Then the person will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 3 years and also liable to pay a fine.
(XI) Punishment of Abetment for Concealing Design to Commit Offence which is Punishable with Imprisonment - Section 120
Section 120 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that whoever voluntarily conceals a design to commit an offence by any method will be punishable for abetment. There may be two cases:
Offence Committed - The abettor will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 1/4 of the longest imprisonment of the abetted offence and also liable to pay a fine.
Offence not Committed - The abettor will be punished with imprisonment which can be extended up to 1/8 of the longest imprisonment of the abetted offence, or fine, or both.
Conclusion
The concept of abetment is one of the most important developments in the legal field. Sometimes, the person who committed the offence is not the real culprit, but the person who abetted them to do so is. The Indian Penal Code provides various punishments for abetment. The liability of a public officer is greater than that of a normal person.