Joint Liability and Group Liability

Vicarious liability/Group liability

Case Summary

Full Case Details

The principle of criminal liability is that the person who commits an offence is responsible and he can only be held guilty. However, the IPC, through sections 34 and 149, makes an exception to the rule by imposing criminal liability on the perpetrator and his associates, who in “furtherance of the common intention” or “prosecution of common object”, participated in the commission of the crime. In such situation, each one of them becomes jointly liable.

Sections 34 Ingredients:

1. Two or more persons.
2. They must have a common intention to commit an offence.
3. Participation by all the accused in doing act or acts in furtherance of that common intention.

The section is only a rule of evidence and does not create a substantive offence. section 34 will come into play even when no specific charge thereunder is leveled against accused if evidence shows that there was pre-arranged plan to commit a criminal act. Absence of charge under section 34 is not fatal by itself unless prejudice to the accused is shown.

The distinctive feature of the section is the element of participation in action.

In order to invoke the principle of joint liability in the commission of a criminal act as laid down in Section 34, the prosecution should show that the criminal act in question was done by one of the accused persons in furtherance of the common intention of all. If this is shown, the liability for the offence may be imposed on any one of the persons in the same manner as if the act was done by him alone. It may be difficult to procure direct evidence to prove the intention of an individual, and in most cases it has to be inferred from the facts and relevant circumstances of the case. The common intention may be through a pre-arranged plan, or it may be generated just prior to the incident.

Section 149

There are two essential ingredients of Section 149, viz.,

• commission of an offence by any member of an unlawful assembly and

• such offence must have been committed in prosecution of the common object of that assembly or must be such as the members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed.

The meaning of the word ‘object’ means the purpose and, in order to make it ‘common’, it must be shared by all. Thus, the object is the goal that the members of the assembly set out to accomplish.

The word “knew” used in the second limb of the section implies something more than a possibility and it cannot be made to bear the sense of “might have been known”. Positive knowledge is necessary.

Section 149 is wider than Section 34. In it the joint liability is founded on ‘common object’; in Section 34 on common intention’. Both sections deal with liability for an offence not committed by the person charged. Section 149 creates a specific offence and deals with the punishment of that offence.

What constitutes an unlawful assembly is given in Section 141 Section 141

Ingredients

An ‘unlawful assembly is an assembly of five or more persons if their common object is

a)  To overawe by criminal force

1. The Central Government, or
2. The State Government, or
3. The Legislature, or
4. Any public servant in the exercise of lawful power

b)  To resist the execution of law or legal process.

• To commit mischief, criminal trespass, or any other offence.

d)  By criminal force

1. To take or obtain possession of any property, or
2. To deprive any person of any incorporeal right, or
3. To enforce any right or supposed right.

e)  By criminal force to compel any person –

1. To do what he is not legally bound to do, or
2. To omit what he is legally entitled to do.