Abetment Questions and Answers

Q: According to Section 107, a person abets the doing of a thing when he :

The answer is All of the above.Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code says a person abets the doing of a thing who:instigates any person to do that thing; orengages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of the conspiracy; orintentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.Each of the first three options states one of these three modes of abetment, so none alone is complete.

Q: For abetment by conspiracy :

For abetment by conspiracy, some act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of the engagement.Section 107 of the IPC describes three forms of abetment. The second, conspiracy, requires that the person engages with others in a conspiracy to do a thing, and that an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order to do that thing. A mere agreement is enough for criminal conspiracy as a separate offence under Section 120A, but not for abetment by conspiracy.Intentional aid is abetment by aiding, and instigation is abetment by instigation, the third and first forms.

Q: Whoever aids or abets the actual commission of crime either at the place where it is committed or eleswhere is a :

Such a person is a principal in the second degree.At common law the principal in the first degree is the one who actually commits the crime. A principal in the second degree is present, actually or constructively, at the commission and aids or abets it, for example by keeping watch.An accessory before the fact counsels or procures the crime but is absent when it is committed, and an accessory after the fact helps the offender escape after the crime.

Q: Which of the following comes under the category, one who assists a felony after his crime with a view to shielding from justice ?

Such a person is an accessory after the fact.In the common-law classification of parties to a felony, an accessory after the fact is one who, knowing that a felony has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the felon in order to shield him from justice.A principal in the first degree commits the offence himself; a principal in the second degree is present and aids or abets at the time; and an accessory before the fact counsels or procures the offence beforehand but is absent when it is committed. Only the accessory after the fact acts after the crime.

Q: Under the Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita 2023, if A, in country X, instigates B to commit a murder in India, what is A guilty of?

A is guilty of abetting murder.Section 48 of the BNS makes it an offence to abet, from outside India, an act committed in India that would be an offence here. Its illustration is this very case: A, in country X, instigates B to commit a murder in India, and A is guilty of abetting murder. Instigation is one of the forms of abetment.A did not commit the killing himself, so he is not guilty of murder as principal. Criminal conspiracy needs an agreement between two or more persons, which mere instigation does not show. So 'Any of the above' is wrong too.

Q: A, residing in Dubai, instigated the Commission of an offence which in consequence was committed in India. Is A liable under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita or not ?

Yes, A is liable under Section 48.Section 48 of the BNS, a new provision, makes a person who, without and beyond India, abets an offence that is committed in India, an abettor punishable under the Sanhita. A instigated the offence from Dubai and it was committed in India, so Section 48 applies directly.Section 46 defines who an abettor is but does not deal with abetment from outside India. Liability does not depend on how strongly A instigated, so options B and D are wrong.

Q: 'A', in India instigates 'B', a foreigner in Bangladesh to commit a murder in Bangladesh. 'B' commits that murder. In this case

'A' is guilty of abetting murder.Section 108A IPC provides that a person abets an offence within the meaning of the Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act outside India which would constitute an offence if committed in India. Its illustration is this very situation: A, in India, instigates B, a foreigner abroad, to commit a murder there, and A is guilty of abetting murder.A did not commit the murder himself, so he is not liable as the murderer, and he is plainly not free of all offence. Since one statement is correct, D is wrong.

According to Section 107, a person abets the doing of a thing when he :

A.Instigates a person to commit an offence
B.Engages with one or more persons in a conspiracy to commit an offence
C.Intentionally aids, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing
D.All of the above

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2018, SET Exam - 2018,

Answer: D

The answer is All of the above.

Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code says a person abets the doing of a thing who:

instigates any person to do that thing; or
engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of the conspiracy; or
intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Each of the first three options states one of these three modes of abetment, so none alone is complete.

Discuss in Forum

For abetment by conspiracy :

A.A mere agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act is enough
B.Some act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of an engagement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act.
C.There must be an intentional aid by one person to another for the doing of an offence.
D.One person must instigate the other for the commission of an offence.

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2019, SET Exam - 2019,

Answer: B

For abetment by conspiracy, some act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of the engagement.

Section 107 of the IPC describes three forms of abetment. The second, conspiracy, requires that the person engages with others in a conspiracy to do a thing, and that an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order to do that thing. A mere agreement is enough for criminal conspiracy as a separate offence under Section 120A, but not for abetment by conspiracy.

Intentional aid is abetment by aiding, and instigation is abetment by instigation, the third and first forms.

Discuss in Forum

Whoever aids or abets the actual commission of crime either at the place where it is committed or eleswhere is a :

A.Principal in the first degree
B.Principal in the second degree
C.Accessory before the fact
D.Accessory after the fact

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2024, SET Exam - 2024,

Answer: B

Such a person is a principal in the second degree.

At common law the principal in the first degree is the one who actually commits the crime. A principal in the second degree is present, actually or constructively, at the commission and aids or abets it, for example by keeping watch.

An accessory before the fact counsels or procures the crime but is absent when it is committed, and an accessory after the fact helps the offender escape after the crime.

Discuss in Forum

Which of the following comes under the category, one who assists a felony after his crime with a view to shielding from justice ?

A.Principal in the first degree
B.Principal in the second degree
C.Accessory before the fact
D.Accessory after the fact

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2025, SET Exam - 2025,

Answer: D

Such a person is an accessory after the fact.

In the common-law classification of parties to a felony, an accessory after the fact is one who, knowing that a felony has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the felon in order to shield him from justice.

A principal in the first degree commits the offence himself; a principal in the second degree is present and aids or abets at the time; and an accessory before the fact counsels or procures the offence beforehand but is absent when it is committed. Only the accessory after the fact acts after the crime.

Discuss in Forum

Under the Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita 2023, if A, in country X, instigates B to commit a murder in India, what is A guilty of?

A.Murder
B.Abetting murder
C.Conspiracy to murder
D.Any of the above

Exam Year(s)

Tripura Public Service Commission - 2025,

Answer: B

A is guilty of abetting murder.

Section 48 of the BNS makes it an offence to abet, from outside India, an act committed in India that would be an offence here. Its illustration is this very case: A, in country X, instigates B to commit a murder in India, and A is guilty of abetting murder. Instigation is one of the forms of abetment.

A did not commit the killing himself, so he is not guilty of murder as principal. Criminal conspiracy needs an agreement between two or more persons, which mere instigation does not show. So 'Any of the above' is wrong too.

Discuss in Forum

A, residing in Dubai, instigated the Commission of an offence which in consequence was committed in India. Is A liable under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita or not ?

A.Yes u/s 48
B.No
C.Yes, u/s 46
D.Depends on the degree of instigation

Exam Year(s)

Tripura Public Service Commission - 2025,

Answer: A

Yes, A is liable under Section 48.

Section 48 of the BNS, a new provision, makes a person who, without and beyond India, abets an offence that is committed in India, an abettor punishable under the Sanhita. A instigated the offence from Dubai and it was committed in India, so Section 48 applies directly.

Section 46 defines who an abettor is but does not deal with abetment from outside India. Liability does not depend on how strongly A instigated, so options B and D are wrong.

Discuss in Forum

'A', in India instigates 'B', a foreigner in Bangladesh to commit a murder in Bangladesh. 'B' commits that murder. In this case

A.'A' is guilty of abetting murder
B.'A' is not guilty of any offence
C.'A' is liable for committing murder
D.None of the above is correct

Exam Year(s)

Tripura Public Service Commission - 2019,

Answer: A

'A' is guilty of abetting murder.

Section 108A IPC provides that a person abets an offence within the meaning of the Code who, in India, abets the commission of any act outside India which would constitute an offence if committed in India. Its illustration is this very situation: A, in India, instigates B, a foreigner abroad, to commit a murder there, and A is guilty of abetting murder.

A did not commit the murder himself, so he is not liable as the murderer, and he is plainly not free of all offence. Since one statement is correct, D is wrong.

Discuss in Forum

Loading…

Abetment Questions and Answers

Topics

Other Subjects

About Us

Abetment Questions and Answers

Topics

Other Subjects

About Us

Stay informed about all important Dates & Notifications