Punishment of abetment if person abetted does act with different intention from that of abettor

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

1. Jaleshwar Singh vs State of Bihar

   Supreme Court of India 06 May 2009 Persuasive (High Court/Supreme Court Guidance) Reportable

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   When the evidence shows that the accused gave exhortation to commit an act with weapons that is likely to cause death, but does not explicitly exhort to cause death, the appropriate conviction is under Section 307 read with Section 110 IPC (abetment of attempt to cause death) rather than Section 302 read with Section 109 IPC (abetment of murder). The distinction between exhortation to kill and exhortation to cause grievous injury using deadly weapons is significant in determining the charge and sentence. Where the exact words of exhortation are ambiguous or disputed in evidence, and where words allegedly added later create doubt about specific intent to kill, the court should lean towards the more conservative interpretation that reflects the abetment of an act likely to cause death rather than direct abetment of murder. A custodial sentence of 7 years is appropriate for such modified conviction.

   On this section: Punishment for abetment of act by conspirator - modified provision applied as appropriate remedy for abetting Section 307 act

   Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.