This article is written by Bandhani Ghosh during her internship with Le Droit India.
Keywords – Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy, instigation, aid, inchoate offences.
Abstract
Incomplete offences like Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy are two different kind of offences but are very much related to each other. Many people think that mere preparation or arrangement of materials to commit a crime but ultimately not doing so , does not lead to any offence. But it that so ? Offences like Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy are inchoate offences where the perpetrators either instigates or engages with other person or persons in a Conspiracy or intentionally aids other person or persons to commit any illegal act or omission. Also, it also includes the offence where two or more persons enters into an agreement to do an illegal act or an act which is legal but to do such act by illegal means. We can say that Abetment is the genus and Criminal Conspiracy is the species.
This article provides a brief overview of both these offences namely – Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy, it’s essentials, punishments, and cases relating these offences. The most important aspect of this article is the difference between abetment and criminal conspiracy, understanding the differences is very important for having a proper and comprehensive idea about these offences of the criminal law of India .
Introduction
There are some kind of offences which are incomplete in nature, that is , it is not required to commit the crime , mere preparation for the materials to commit such crime can constitute an inchoate offence. Such offences requires only the anticipation and arrangements for the things to commit a crime , even if the crime has not been committed later.
Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy are examples of inchoate offences. Chapter 5 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 talks about the offence of instigation and helping other person to commit an illegal act. Chapter 5 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 talks about the offence of agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or a legal work by illegal means. Section 120 A of chapter 5A was introduced by the Criminal Amendment Act, 1913.
Abetment
Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides the definition of Abetment of a thing. As per the section, a person abets another person by instigation or engaging in a criminal conspiracy to commit a crime or by intentionally aiding by any act or illegal omission[1]. The term “abet” means to aid or to provoke a person to commit a crime.
In the case of Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1961[2], the apex Court of India defined the term “abet” as aiding and helping others in committing an illegal act. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides provisions regarding abetment from sections 107 to 120 .
Illustration : There are three people A,B and C . A and B plan to kill C . A set the traps to kill C and B , being aware of the plan, helps A create those traps. This act of B is abetment as he helped A create traps to kill C .
Here , B is known as abettor, and A is known as principal offender.
Criminal Conspiracy
The term ‘conspiracy’ has been derived from the Latin words “con”, which means together and “spirare” which means to breathe.
In section 120A of the IPC, criminal Conspiracy has been defined as , agreement between two or more persons to cause an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means.[3]
As per the proviso, there is no need to prove the commission of any illegal act along with the agreement to commit an offence. This requirement arises only when there is an intention to commit an illegal act that is not itself an offence. It is immaterial whether the illegal act is the primary objective of the agreement or merely incidental to it.[4]
Illustration: There are 3 people A , B and C. They all decided to rob a bank and entered into an agreement. They plan the heist, arrange weapons, and decide their roles. But they have been caught by the police before committing the robbery, they still be liable for their offence of committing Criminal Conspiracy for doing an illegal act.
Difference between Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy
- Definition
Abetment as been defined in section 107 , is a situation where a person instigates or conspires or intentionally aids another person to commit a crime.
Criminal Conspiracy as been defined in section 120A, means a situation where two or more persons make an agreement to commit an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means.
- Parties
There are usually two parties involved in abetment..one is the abettor and other is the principal offender.
In case of Criminal Conspiracy , there is a requirement of minimum two parties…who are known as conspirators.
- Nature of offence
Abetment is not substantive in nature which means to constitute an offence of abetment, there must be an act of instigation or engaging in a Conspiracy or intentionally aiding other person to commit a crime.
In case of Criminal Conspiracy, it’s nature id substantive which means, mere agreement to commit an offence is punishable even if the offence is not actually committed.
- Punishment
The punishment of an abettor may not be same as that of the principal offender.
But all conspirators are liable to same punishments.
- Legal Proceedings
No prior sanction from the competent authorities is required to proceed against abettors
In case of Criminal Conspiracy, prosecution may require prior sanction from competent authorities.
- Scope
Abetment is the genus . It’s scope of broad. It includes various ways to help the principal offender including engaging in a Conspiracy.
Criminal Conspiracy is said to be a species of Abetment and includes only the involvement in an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime . Hence , it’s scope is narrow.
Judgements clarifying the differences between Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy
- Pramatha Nath Talukdar v Saroj Ranjan Sarkar , 1961[5]
In this case, the held that the essence of criminal Conspiracy lies in the intention to carry out an illegal act by committing an illegal act. The agreement itself constitutes a Criminal Conspiracy but in case of an agreement which is made to commit an act which is not an offence, need some act or omission to be done by one or more parties along with the mere agreement, to constitute Criminal Conspiracy. This way a Criminal Conspiracy is differentiated from Abetment by Conspiracy. Hence, in case of Criminal Conspiracy, agreeing to commit a crime itself constitutes the crime.
- Kehar Singh v. State( Delhi Administration), 1988 [6]
The apex Court, in this case, further elaborated the distinction between Abetment by Conspiracy and Criminal Conspiracy by stating that there must be evidence of more than a mere Conspiracy to prove abetment by Conspiracy.
Through this judgement, it can be said that if a charge of Criminal Conspiracy fails against the appellants, a proof of an overt act done by the appelants can convict them of Abetment by Conspiracy.
- Surendra Mohan Basu v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, 1960[7]
The court emphasised on the procedural part of criminal Conspiracy and Abetment by Conspiracy. It said that section 196A of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) does not need previous sanction for the offence of Abetment by Conspiracy. But such a sanction is required in case of Criminal Conspiracy.
Conclusion
The two types of inchoate offences, namely Criminal Conspiracy and Abetment are both similar as well as different. The judiciary has differentiated between these two offences in various aspects. These distinctions are essential for proper understanding and application of the law and for ensuring that the accused is charged and prosecuted due to their actual nature of crime.
References
- Indian Penal Code, 1860, section 107,No. 45, Acts of Parliament,1860.
- Kartar Singh v state of Punjab,(1994)3 SCC 569.
- Indian Penal Code, 1860, section 120A,No. 45, Acts of Parliament,1860.
- https://lawbhoomi.com/kartar-singh-v-state-of-punjab/
- Pramatha Nath Talukdar v Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, AIR 1962 SC 876.
- https://indiankanoon.org/doc/980023/
- Surendra Mohan Basu v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, AIR1961CAL461.
The plagiarism report below is till the sub headings before the sub heading “ Judgements clarifying the differences between Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy”
The plagiarism report for the remaining part has been pasted below :
[1] Indian Penal Code, 1860, section 107,No. 45, Acts of Parliament,1860.
[2] Kartar Singh v state of Punjab,(1994)3 SCC 569.
[3] Indian Penal Code, 1860, section 120A,No. 45, Acts of Parliament,1860.
[4] Aishwarya Agrawal, Difference Between Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy, LawBhoomi( 22nd March, 2025, 3:30 am ) , https://lawbhoomi.com/difference-between-abetment-and-criminal-conspiracy/.
[5] Pramatha Nath Talukdar v Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, AIR 1962 SC 876.
[6] Kehar Singh v State of Punjab, AIR 1959 PandH 8.
[7] Surendra Mohan Basu v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, AIR1961CAL461.
