Summary
The Supreme Court gave a driver accompanying two armed assailants the benefit of doubt on murder and dangerous-weapon hurt liability under Section 34 IPC. The sole supporting eyewitness attributed no specific assault on the deceased, weapon, exhortation or facilitation to him, and did not place him in the earlier quarrel. His presence and the general account of collective assault did not establish shared murderous intention with certainty. His conviction and sentence for simple hurt under Sections 323/34 were nevertheless affirmed.
Issues
- Whether the appellant shared the principal assailants’ common intention to commit murder or dangerous-weapon hurt.
- Whether his liability for simple hurt should survive the benefit of doubt on the other charges.
Provisions considered
- Section 34, read with Sections 302 and 323, Indian Penal Code, 1860Common-intention liability required evidence of the shared intention and conduct in its furtherance; accompanying the principal culprits did not establish responsibility for every act they committed. (¶ 13-17)
Held
- A person accompanying principal offenders does not necessarily share their intention concerning every eventual act. Common intention must be established from the circumstances, conduct or other cogent incriminating evidence. The assessment is specific to the offence sought to be attributed vicariously. (¶ 13-15)
- The sole supporting eyewitness attributed no weapon, specific assault on the deceased, exhortation or facilitation to the appellant. Nor was he placed in the earlier quarrel. The general allegation of collective assault did not establish with certainty that he shared or furthered the intention to murder. He therefore received benefit of doubt on the charges under Sections 302 and 324 through Section 34. (¶ 13-16)
- The conviction and sentence under Sections 323/34 remained affirmed. Release was directed if that sentence had been undergone and custody was not required for another offence; the Court did not order an unconditional acquittal on every count. (¶ 16-17)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Appellant acquitted of charges other than Sections 323/34, whose conviction and sentence were affirmed. Conditional release directed upon completion of that sentence.