Section Overview
Section Number:
IPC Section 108
Section Title:
Abettor
Act:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)
Status:
Replaced under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023
Applicability:
IPC Section 108 applies whenever a court is required to determine whether a person qualifies as an "abettor" under criminal law. The section explains who can be treated as an abettor and establishes the legal requirements for imposing liability based on abetment.
The provision operates together with IPC Section 107, which defines abetment through instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid.
Original Law Text
"A person abets an offence, who abets either the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an offence if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor."
The section also contains multiple explanations and illustrations clarifying the scope of the term "abettor."
Section Explanation
Simple Explanation (Plain English/Hinglish)
IPC Section 108 batata hai ki "abettor" kaun hota hai.
Agar koi vyakti kisi doosre vyakti ko crime karne ke liye:
-
Uksata hai,
-
Madad karta hai,
-
Ya conspiracy mein participate karta hai,
to wo abettor kehlata hai.
Law ke nazar mein sirf actual offender hi responsible nahi hota.
Jo vyakti crime karwane mein role play karta hai, wo bhi criminal liability face kar sakta hai.
Simple words mein:
"Jo vyakti kisi offence ko karne mein encourage, facilitate ya assist karta hai, use abettor kaha jata hai."
Legal Definition (Original Law Text)
According to IPC Section 108:
An abettor is a person who abets:
-
The commission of an offence; or
-
The commission of an act which would amount to an offence if committed by a legally capable person having the same intention or knowledge.
Practical Interpretation
The section broadens criminal liability beyond the principal offender.
Courts examine:
-
Whether abetment took place.
-
Whether the accused played an active role.
-
Whether criminal intention existed.
-
Whether assistance, encouragement, or participation occurred.
An abettor need not physically commit the offence.
Even indirect participation may attract criminal liability.
Important Features of Section 108
Direct Participation Not Necessary
The abettor may never personally commit the offence.
Presence at Crime Scene Not Required
Physical presence is not always essential.
Liability Can Exist Before the Offence
Planning, instigation, or preparation may constitute abetment.
Mental Element Is Important
Criminal intention or knowledge is generally required.
Explanations Under Section 108
The section contains several explanations clarifying important principles.
These include:
Explanation 1
Abetment may exist even if the act ultimately committed differs slightly from the original plan, provided the offence remains connected to the instigation or assistance.
Explanation 2
The person abetted need not be legally capable of committing the offence.
Explanation 3
The offence abetted need not actually be committed for abetment liability to arise in some situations.
Explanation 4
Abetment can occur through communication, advice, assistance, or encouragement.
Why IPC Section 108 Was Introduced?
The legislature recognized that many crimes involve multiple participants.
Without Section 108:
-
Masterminds could avoid punishment.
-
Organizers could escape liability.
-
Influential persons could commit crimes through others.
The provision therefore ensures accountability for everyone involved in criminal conduct.
Relationship with IPC Section 107
Section 107 explains:
"What is abetment?"
Section 108 explains:
"Who is an abettor?"
Together, the two sections form the foundation of abetment law under the IPC.
Punishment & Legal Classification
Punishment
IPC Section 108 itself does not prescribe punishment.
Punishment is generally provided under IPC Sections 109 to 120 depending upon:
-
Nature of offence,
-
Stage of commission,
-
Degree of participation.
Bailable / Non-Bailable
Depends upon the offence abetted.
Cognizable / Non-Cognizable
Depends upon the principal offence.
Compoundable
Depends upon the offence involved.
Triable By
Depends upon the offence and applicable punishment provisions.
IPC ↔ BNS Mapping
IPC Section
IPC Section 108
BNS Equivalent
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita continues the concept of abetment and criminal participation through corresponding provisions relating to abettors.
Status
IPC repealed and replaced by BNS.
However, the principle of holding abettors liable remains substantially preserved.
Real-Life Examples
Example 1: Contract Killing
A pays B money to kill C.
B commits the murder.
A may be treated as an abettor even though he never physically attacks C.
Example 2: Supplying Illegal Weapons
A knowingly provides firearms to criminals for committing robbery.
A may be liable as an abettor because he intentionally facilitated the offence.
Example 3: Encouraging Fraud
A persuades B to prepare fake documents for obtaining a bank loan.
Even if A does not personally submit the documents, he may be treated as an abettor.
Landmark Judgments
Case Name:
Jamuna Singh v. State of Bihar
Court:
Supreme Court of India
Key Takeaway:
The Court clarified the relationship between abetment and the role of an abettor, emphasizing active involvement and criminal intention.
Case Name:
Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Court:
Supreme Court of India
Key Takeaway:
The Court explained that instigation requires active encouragement or incitement and cannot be inferred from every casual statement.
Case Name:
Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh
Court:
Supreme Court of India
Key Takeaway:
The judgment highlighted that mens rea remains a critical component in determining liability for abetment.
Legal Insights
When Is This Section Applied?
Section 108 is commonly applied when:
-
Multiple persons participate in a crime.
-
A mastermind acts through others.
-
Assistance is provided for criminal conduct.
-
Criminal conspiracies are investigated.
-
Abetment of serious offences is alleged.
Common Misuse Scenarios
Mere Association
Friendship or acquaintance with an offender does not automatically make someone an abettor.
Mere Presence
Being present at a crime scene alone is insufficient.
Lack of Criminal Intent
Without intention or knowledge, abetment liability may not arise.
False Implication
Family, business, or political disputes sometimes lead to exaggerated allegations of abetment.
Defenses Available
Absence of Mens Rea
The accused may argue that criminal intention never existed.
No Instigation
No encouragement or provocation was given.
No Conspiracy
No agreement existed to commit an unlawful act.
No Intentional Aid
The accused's conduct was innocent and unrelated to the offence.
Lack of Evidence
The prosecution failed to establish participation beyond reasonable doubt.