Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of unlawful assembly. An unlawful assembly is defined as a group of five or more people who come together with the common intention of committing a crime or disturbing the public peace.
Under section 149, if any member of an unlawful assembly does an act with the common intention of the assembly, then each member of the assembly is deemed to have committed the same act. This means that all members of the assembly can be held equally responsible for any action taken by any member of the assembly.
For example, if a group of six people come together with the intention of committing a theft, and one member of the group actually carries out the theft, then all six members can be held equally responsible for the theft under section 149.
One of the main purposes of this section is to deter people from joining or participating in unlawful assemblies. It is intended to send a message that anyone who takes part in such assemblies will be held accountable for the actions of the group.
However, it should be noted that in order to be found guilty under section 149, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual was a member of the unlawful assembly and had the common intention of the assembly. Simply being present at the scene of the crime or being associated with the other members of the assembly is not sufficient to establish guilt under this section.
In summary, section 149 of the IPC is a legal provision that holds members of an unlawful assembly equally responsible for any actions taken by the group, with the intention of deterring people from participating in such assemblies.
Landmark Judgment on Section 141 and 149 of IPC
Absolutely right There can be no denying it Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. C is crystal clear that even mere presence in unlawful assembly, but with an active mind, to achieve the common object, makes a person vicariously liable for the act of unlawful assembly as held by the Apex Court in the case of Amerika Rai Vs. You shall also abide by the Program Policies which will be applicable on you in connection with the SoOLEGAL site. At the time of consideration of bail application of an accused, it would be unsafe to deny bail to an accused, implicated for committing offence under Section 149 I. IPC 149 Section — Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object Indian Penal Code IPC 149 Section If an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, or such as the members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object, every person who, at the time of the committing of that offence, is a member of the same assembly, is guilty of that offence.
The law of vicarious liability under Section 149 I. C has following three essentials i there must be unlawful assembly; ii commission of offence may be by any member of unlawful assembly; iii such offence must have been committed in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, or must be such as member of the assembly knew to be likely to be committed. Joseph Mingel Koli, 1997 2 Crimes 228 Bom. In such cases, all the accused persons can be charged with Section 149. An appropriate amendment in the section either by the Parliament or a suitable interpretation by the Courts is necessary to prevent the misuse of the section. When the Indian Penal Code of 1860 was enacted by the British, Section 149 was inserted to suppress any revolt by the people of India against the British.
Suitability of Section 149 IPC and Fundamental Rights: A review
The Court observed that even though both the sections create vicarious liability on the members of the group, there are some crucial differences between the two of them. Without beating about the bush and without leaving any room for ambiguity of any kind, the Allahabad High Court has in a most learned, laudable, landmark and latest judgment titled Sanjeev Kallu Sethiya in Criminal Misc. As per judgements of Apex Court in the case of Ramchandran supra and Bhanwar Singh Supra , nature of arm used is one of the necessary ingredients for considering the common object of the accused who had formed unlawful assembly. Further, when the Court examined the facts of the instant case, it found that out of the three ingredients discussed above, the third ingredient for constituting an offence under Section 149 I. You may not issue any press release or make any public statement related to the Services, or use our name, trademarks or logo in any way including in promotional material without our advance written permission, or misrepresent or embellish the relationship between us in any way.
News: Alteration of Conviction from Section 149 IPC To Section 34 IPC: Only after proving 'Common Intention' : Supreme Court
Â Therefore, by analysing the above judgements it can be concluded where a murder has been committed by any member of the unlawful assembly, the rest of the members cannot be charged under Section 302. If the Court had not analysed the facts carefully then an innocent might have served in Jail for an offence he did not commit. Finally, the Bench concludes by holding in para 53 that: Registrar compliance is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned within a week. The section therefore becomes too wide is its sweep and implicates: 1- Persons who may be villagers or just bystanders only on account of their presence and treated as part of a group even if they have not committed any overt act. The court further went on to say that The Court must guard against the possibility of convicting mere passive onlookers who did not share the common object of the unlawful assembly.
The court was of idea that nowadays Investigating Officer apply Section 149 of IPC as per their understanding. Unlawful assembly under Section 141 IPC 1. The injury caused to the injured was on his leg and will not constitute offence under Section 307 I. This was observed by the Court in Gangadhar Behera v. The appellant in the present appeal has alleged that a complaint was lodged with the police by the victim Ranbir Singh on 26. If we are required by law or by administration thereof to collect any value added, service, sales, use, goods and services or similar taxes from you, you will pay such taxes to us or the Professionals you sought for professional service.
Section 149 IPC Is One Of The Most Misused And Misinterpreted Provisions Of The Present Times: All HC Article
You will use only a name you are authorized to use in connection with the Service and will update such information as necessary to ensure that it at all times remain accurate and complete. In the case, 11 accused persons were convicted by the Trial Court for murder of a lady. The basis of liability is common intention. It is manifest that the first three grounds do not make out a case for special leave but we think that the fourth ground does. State of Madhya Pradesh 2022 Facts In this Issue raised Whether the accused was rightly convicted under Section 149 even though the charges were formed against less than 5 persons? Misuse of Section 149 IPC Whenever there is the presence of more than 5 persons at a crime scene, the prosecution mechanically invokes Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with other provisions of the IPC. There cannot be any straight jacket formula to arrive at a finding as to who was the member of unlawful assembly and for which object the same was formed.
Section 149 IPC Is One Of The Most Misused And Misinterpreted Provisions Of The Present Times: Allahabad High Court
In Vithal Bhimshah Koli v. The scrutiny of section 149 on the touchstone of fundamental rights has become the need of the hour because of the alarming misuse of the section by the prosecuting agencies. It is well settled that mere presence in an assembly does not make such a person a member of an unlawful assembly unless it is shown that he had done something or omitted to do something which would make him a member of an unlawful assembly, or unless the case falls under Section 142 Indian Penal Code. SoOLEGAL reserves the right to charge you any applicable unbilled PAN if you provide a PAN registration number, or evidence of being in a Professional Firm, that is determined to be invalid. P AIR 1975 S. Most remarkably, the Bench then hastens to add in para 44 that: In the present case this court finds that out of three ingredients discussed above, third ingredient for constituting offence under Section 149 I. Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code Abetment of Suicide is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Though the concept of vicarious liability was introduced, unlike the modern day section 149, the sentence was restricted. We, therefore, do not find that the appellants suffered any adverse effect when the High Court held the three of them individually guilty for the offence of attempted murder, without the aid of Section 149 IPC. This provision is very crucial in making members of an unlawful assembly liable for the commission of an offence but sometimes there have been cases where innocent people have been charged under this Section. Conclusion The provision creates vicarious liability for the members of the unlawful assembly in prosecution of a common object which means that every person would be held liable irrespective of the fact whether he has caused injury to the victim or not because they were a member of an unlawful assembly and an offence was committed according to their common object. If any discrepancy is not reported within 15 days of receipt of payment, such payment shall be deemed accepted and SoOLEGAL shall not entertain any such reports thereafter.
Section 149 IPC assigns liability merely by membership of the unlawful assembly: Supreme Court
Therefore, establishing a common object is very crucial for making the members of the assembly liable for an offence. This was held in Lalji and Ors v. WE DO NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE SoOLEGAL SITE OR THE SERVICES WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR BE AVAILABLE, TIMELY, SECURE, UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, AND WE WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SYSTEM FAILURES OR OTHER INTERRUPTIONS THAT MAY AFFECT THE RECEIPT, PROCESSING, ACCEPTANCE, COMPLETION OR SETTLEMENT OF ANY TRANSACTIONS OR ANY OTHER INTERRUPTION CAUSED DUE TO ANY FORCE MAJEURE EVENT WHERE WE DO NOT GUARANTEE ANY BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN TILL THE CESSATION OF SUCH FORCE MAJEURE EVENT. To attract this provision there must be an evidence of an assembly with the common object becoming an unlawful one. It will be triable by the court in which the offence committed by the unlawful assembly will be triable. For attracting second part of section 149 IPC, vicarious liability, it must be shown that the members of the assembly knew that the offence committed is likely to be committed in prosecution of the common objective. It could have been done after considering the versions of both sides by the investigating officer, which he was required to do as per law, but he has again miserably failed in performance of his legal duty.