INTRODUCTION

To determine the degree of culpability it is necessary to check the nature and degree of participation of a person. Not always a single person is responsible for committing a crime all others who support him by providing aids or by instigating or by other means is responsible for that crime. Such Inciting, empowering, and aiding anyone for doing any criminal act is also punishable under Chapter V of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The term ‘abet’ means to aid, to assist or to give aid, to command, to procure, or to counsel, to countenance, to encourage, or encourage or to set another one to commit.

ABETMENT UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE

The Indian Penal Code makes a wide qualification among principals and abettors but doesn’t perceive the accomplice sometime later except that holding onto offenders has been made a substantive offense. As indicated by Indian laws, a principal is an individual who perpetrates crime and an abettor is an individual who helps the principal in the commission of the crime

Sections 107-120 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the concept of Abetment. According to Section 107 abetment is constituted in three ways;

1. INSTIGATION- It means to provoke someone either by counseling or by procuring to commit an offense. For instigation, a person must incite someone by any direct or indirect means. Mere acquiescence or verbal permission would not amount to instigation.
   For instance, if A told B, C, and D that he wants to kill E, B suggested A the method to kill whereas C provided A a revolver, and D remained silent. In this case, B and C will be held liable for abetment whereas D will not be held liable as he didn’t actively suggest or by any other direct or indirect means provoked A to commit an offense.
   But If the bar owner doesn’t ask his customers to leave the bar after closing time then such bar owner will also be held liable for the commission of a crime.
   It implies that some active proceeding towards the perpetration of a crime is necessary.
   Explanation 1 to Section 107 states that Instigation by willful concealment or by willful misrepresentation of the fact which is mandatory to disclose according to the law will amount to abetment.
   
2. CONSPIRACY- It means an agreement to do an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means. Mere conspiracy doesn’t amount to abetment it is mandatory to commit an offense for a conspiracy to become an abetment according to Section107 of the Indian Penal Code. If the principal is acquitted by the court then all the abettors conspiring principal will be acquitted. According to Explanation 5 of Section 108, it is not necessary that all the members joining the conspiracy must know about every detail of the offense. Also, the abettor doesn’t need to discuss the offense with the person who commits it.
   
3. AID – If a person facilitates the aids to commit an offense would be guilty of “abetment by aids”. Here the intention of the facilitator is considered to check his crime; if the abettor is not knowing the offense, then he would not be held liable for abetment. The facility given to aid an offense must be an essential element for the commission of the crime. If A asked B to call C at his home for dinner and during dinner A killed B, here if B does not know A’s intention to kill C then he will not be held liable under abetment.
   

WHO IS AN ABETTOR?

Section 108 specifically deals with abetment of an ‘offense’ whereas Section 107 deals with abetment of a thing. According to Section 108, an abettor is a person who abets the commission of the offense or a person who abets the commission of an act done by the principal who is suffering from any physical or mental disability which incapacitates him to commit an offense. If abetted falls in category ii then conviction of abettor does not depend upon the conviction of mentally/ physically disabled abetted.

The abetment of the illegal omission of the offense may add up to an offense although the abettor may not himself will undoubtedly do that offense. Accordingly, if a public servant is liable on an illegal omission of obligation made punishable by the code, and a private person prompts him he abets the offense of which public servant is liable, although the abettor, being a private person, couldn’t himself have been liable of the offense?

The act doesn’t need to abet should be completed to constitute an offense of abetment that is if abetted refuses to do the act given by abettor or if the result of act abetted doesn’t come in the way as planned then also the abettor will be held liable for abetment. Here the intention of the person who abets will be checked instead of checking the intention of the person abetted. (Explanation 2 of Section 108,).

Abetment of abetment is also an offense. For example, if the accused asked a medical practitioner and her neighbor to provide her poison to kill her son-in-law and the medical practitioner brought poison for her. In this case, the medical practitioner will be abettor to abet the accused to commit murder of her son in law. It implies “if abetment of an offense is an offense the abetment of such an abetment is also an offense”.

CONCLUSION

The punishments related to abetment are defined in Sections 109-120. Abetment is different from common intention as in common intention is no offense of its own it is to be read with other offenses mentioned in IPC. Also, a commission of a crime is a mandatory ingredient of common intention and not an important ingredient in the case of Abetment. There is an important concept of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The definition of abetment in section 306 needs to conform to the definition given under section 107 of the IPC. Proving the direct involvement by the accused in such abetment to suicide is necessary and mens rea is the important ingredient to prove the conviction.

Through the above explanation, it is observed that the person who commits a crime (principal) will be held liable under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 whereas the abettor will be held liable under Chapter V of the Indian Penal Code for instigating the principal to commit such crime.