Emergency Bail?  Call  +91-9773727566  —  Available 24/7
ipc

IPC Section 38 — Persons Concerned in Criminal Act May Be Guilty of Different Offences

Adv. Kuldeep Kumar June 04, 2026 5 min read

Section Overview

Section Number: IPC Section 38

Section Title: Persons Concerned in Criminal Act May Be Guilty of Different Offences

Act: Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)

Status: Replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, though the principle continues to be recognized.

Applicability: Applicable where several persons are involved in the same criminal act but possess different intentions, knowledge, or levels of participation, resulting in liability for different offences.

Original Law Text:

"Where several persons are engaged or concerned in the commission of a criminal act, they may be guilty of different offences by means of that act."

This section recognizes that criminal liability is often individual and depends upon the specific mental state and conduct of each participant.

Section Explanation

Simple Explanation (Plain English/Hinglish)

IPC Section 38 ka simple matlab hai:

Agar ek hi criminal act mein kai log involved hain, to zaroori nahi ki sab ek hi offence ke guilty hon.

Har person ki:

  • Intention

  • Knowledge

  • Participation

  • Circumstances

alag ho sakti hain.

Isliye same incident mein different log different offences ke liable ho sakte hain.

Legal Definition

Section 38 ka purpose individual criminal liability ko recognize karna hai.

Law maanta hai ki:

  • Same act

  • Same incident

  • Same occurrence

hone ke bawajood sab accused ki guilt same nahi hoti.

Court har accused ka role separately evaluate karti hai.

Practical Interpretation

Courts generally examine:

  • Kis accused ne kya kiya?

  • Uski intention kya thi?

  • Usko kya knowledge thi?

  • Uska participation kitna tha?

In factors ke basis par offences determine hote hain.

Why IPC Section 38 Is Important?

Criminal law ka fundamental principle hai:

Individual culpability.

Har accused ko uske own conduct ke basis par judge kiya jana chahiye.

Agar law sabko automatically same offence ke liye punish kare to injustice ho sakta hai.

Section 38 is problem ko solve karti hai.

Understanding Different Degrees of Guilt

Example:

Teen log kisi person ko attack karte hain.

  • Person A death cause karne ki intention se attack karta hai.

  • Person B sirf hurt cause karna chahta hai.

  • Person C ko serious consequences ka knowledge nahi hai.

Same incident hone ke bawajood liability different ho sakti hai.

Mental Element Matters

Criminal liability sirf action se determine nahi hoti.

Mental state bhi important hoti hai.

Courts evaluate:

  • Intention

  • Knowledge

  • Recklessness

  • Negligence

Ye factors offence ki gravity decide karte hain.

Individual Assessment

Section 38 ensure karti hai ki:

Har accused ka separate assessment ho.

Court blanket conviction approach adopt nahi karti.

Example of Different Liability

Suppose:

A and B jointly assault C.

A knife use karta hai aur death cause karne ka intention rakhta hai.

B sirf fist blows deta hai.

Court conclude kar sakti hai:

  • A liable for murder.

  • B liable for causing hurt.

Same incident, different offences.

Relationship with Section 34

IPC Section 34 common intention ke baare mein hai.

Section 38 different offences ke possibility ko recognize karti hai.

Dono provisions coexist kar sakti hain.

Relationship with Section 37

Section 37 cooperation ko address karti hai.

Section 38 individual guilt ke differences ko explain karti hai.

Importance in Group Crimes

Group crimes mein ye section particularly important hai.

Examples:

  • Riots

  • Mob violence

  • Group assaults

  • Organized crime

  • Financial frauds

Har participant ka role same nahi hota.

Application in Modern Criminal Cases

Cybercrime aur economic offences mein bhi Section 38 ka concept frequently relevant hota hai.

Example:

  • Planner

  • Executor

  • Facilitator

  • Beneficiary

Sabka liability level different ho sakta hai.

Judicial Approach

Indian courts repeatedly emphasize karti hain ki:

Criminal liability individualized honi chahiye.

Evidence har accused ke against separately evaluate ki jati hai.

Protection Against Unfair Convictions

Section 38 ensure karti hai ki:

  • Minor participant ko major offender ke barabar punish na kiya jaye.

  • Mental state properly evaluate ki jaye.

  • Justice proportionate rahe.

Punishment & Legal Classification

Punishment: IPC Section 38 khud punishment prescribe nahi karti.

Punishment depends on the offence for which each accused is convicted.

Example:

  • One accused convicted for murder.

  • Another convicted for grievous hurt.

  • Another convicted for simple hurt.

Each punishment different hogi.

Bailable / Non-Bailable: Depends on actual offence.

Cognizable / Non-Cognizable: Depends on actual offence.

Compoundable: Depends on actual offence.

Triable By: Depends on actual offence.

Section 38 only explains liability principles.

IPC ↔ BNS Mapping

IPC Section: IPC Section 38

BNS Equivalent: Corresponding principle substantially retained under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Status: Concept continued.

Modern criminal law continues to recognize that participants in the same act may be guilty of different offences.

Real-Life Examples

Example 1: Group Assault

Three persons attack a victim.

One uses a deadly weapon.

Others use hands and sticks.

Court may convict them for different offences based on intention and conduct.

Example 2: Financial Fraud

One accused designs the fraud.

Second executes transactions.

Third unknowingly assists.

Different levels of criminal liability may arise.

Example 3: Riot Situation

During a riot:

  • One participant causes death.

  • Another damages property.

  • Another causes simple injuries.

All may face different charges despite being part of the same event.

Landmark Judgments

Case Name:

Pandurang v. State of Hyderabad

Court: Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

The Court emphasized examining the role and intention of each accused separately.

Case Name:

Mahbub Shah v. King Emperor

Court: Privy Council

Key Takeaway:

Liability depends on evidence regarding intention and participation.

Case Name:

Virendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

Different accused may bear different degrees of criminal responsibility.

Case Name:

Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Administration)

Court: Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

Individual participation and mental state remain crucial in determining guilt.

Legal Insights

When Is This Section Applied?

IPC Section 38 is commonly applied in:

  • Group assaults

  • Mob violence cases

  • Riot prosecutions

  • Criminal conspiracies

  • Economic offences

  • Corporate crimes

  • Cybercrime investigations

  • Joint criminal activities

Common Misuse Scenarios

Treating All Accused Equally

Investigators sometimes assume identical liability for all participants.

Section 38 discourages this approach.

 Ignoring Individual Intentions

Mental state must always be examined separately.

 Weak Evidence Against Certain Accused

Presence at the scene alone may not justify serious charges.

 Assumption-Based Convictions

Courts require evidence regarding each accused's role.

Defenses Available

Common defenses include:

  • Lack of intention.

  • Lack of knowledge.

  • Limited participation.

  • Mere presence.

  • Mistaken identity.

  • False implication.

  • Good faith conduct.

  • Absence of criminal act.

Each accused may raise separate defenses based on individual facts.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified advocate for your specific legal matter.
Adv. Kuldeep Kumar
Verified Advocate
Bar Council Reg: BR/196/2015

Frequently Asked Questions

IPC Section 38 states that persons involved in the same criminal act may be guilty of different offences depending on their conduct and mental state.

No. It is an interpretative provision regarding criminal liability.

It depends on the actual offence for which a person is charged.

There is no separate punishment. Punishment depends on the specific offence committed.

Yes. That is the primary principle recognized by Section 38.

It ensures fair and individualized criminal liability.

Not necessarily. Courts examine participation and intention.

Yes. It is frequently applied in group violence cases.

Yes. Different accused may receive different punishments depending on their convictions.

The principle continues under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 through similar doctrines of individual criminal responsibility.
Share:
24/7 Emergency Bail
For urgent bail matters, call now
+91-9773727566

Need Legal Assistance?

Our team of verified advocates is here to help you. Get a free consultation today.

Book Free Consultation