When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly abetted it:
Provided that the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment, and was committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment.
llustrations.
(a) A instigates a child to put poison into the food of Z, and gives him poison for that purpose. The child, in consequence of the instigation, by mistake puts the poison into the food of Y, which is by the side of that of Z. Here, if the child was acting under the influence of A’s instigation, and the act done was under the circumstances a probable consequence of the abetment, A is liable in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had instigated the child to put the poison into the food of Y.
(b) A instigates B to burn Z’s house, B sets fire to the house and at the same time commits theft of property there. A, though guilty of abetting the burning of the house, is not guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a distinct act, and not a probable consequence of the burning.
(c) A instigates B and C to break into an inhabited house at midnight for the purpose of robbery, and provides them with arms for that purpose. B and C break into the house, and being resisted by Z, one of the inmates, murder Z. Here, if that murder was the probable consequence of the abetment, A is liable to the punishment provided for murder.
Simplified Explanation
Section 51 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) addresses situations where an abettor encourages or assists in committing a specific act, but the person carrying out the act performs a different one. This section clarifies the extent of the abettor’s liability when there is a discrepancy between the act intended by the abettor and the actual act committed.
Key Elements of Section 51
- Applicability of Section 51
- Section 51 applies in cases where:
- An abettor has encouraged or facilitated the commission of a particular offense.
- The person performing the act does something different than what was originally abetted.
- This section addresses liability when the actual outcome differs from the abettor’s intended act.
- Section 51 applies in cases where:
- Liability of the Abettor
- The abettor may still be held liable if the act ultimately committed is a probable consequence of the abetted act.
- The liability depends on whether the act done was reasonably foreseeable or connected to the act the abettor intended to promote.
- If the act committed is significantly different and unrelated to the abetted act, the abettor may not be held liable.
- Focus on Probable Consequences
- Section 51 places emphasis on whether the act committed was a “probable consequence” of the one originally abetted.
- If the actual act falls within the range of outcomes that could have reasonably followed the abettor’s intent, the abettor may still be accountable.
- Example Scenarios
- Example 1: An abettor encourages someone to commit arson in a small area of a building. If the fire spreads and causes extensive damage, the abettor could still be held liable because large-scale damage is a probable consequence of starting a fire.
- Example 2: If an abettor instigates someone to cause minor injury but the person ends up causing fatal harm, the abettor’s liability would depend on whether the fatal harm was a foreseeable outcome of the initial act of causing injury.
- Protection from Unrelated Acts
- Section 51 prevents an abettor from being punished for outcomes that are entirely unrelated or far removed from their original intent.
- This provision ensures fairness by holding abettors liable only for outcomes closely connected to the actions they encouraged, avoiding excessive or unjust penalties.
Importance of Section 51
Section 51 is important for ensuring proportionate liability by establishing that abettors are responsible only for foreseeable outcomes of the acts they encourage. It balances accountability with fairness, making sure that punishment aligns with the abettor’s role in influencing the crime.
In summary, Section 51 of the BNS holds abettors liable if the act ultimately committed is a probable or foreseeable consequence of the act they abetted. This provision ensures that individuals are responsible for the outcomes of their encouragement while protecting them from liability for unforeseen or unrelated acts.
