When an act is abetted with the intention on the part of the abettor of causing a particular effect, and an act for which the abettor is liable in consequence of the abetment, cause a different effect from that intended by the abettor, the abettor is liable for the effect caused, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had abetted the act with the intention of causing that effect, provided he knew that the act abetted was likely to cause that effect.
Illustration
A instigates B to cause grievous hurt to Z. B, in consequence of the instigation, causes grievous hurt to Z. Z dies in consequence. Here, if A knew that the grievous hurt abetted was likely to cause death, A is liable to be punished with the punishment provided for murder.
Classification of this Offence
Punishment—Same as for offence committed—According as offence abetted is cognizable or non-cognizable—According as offence abetted is bailable or non-bailable—Triable by court by which offence abetted is triable—Non-compoundable.
IPC Section 113: Simplified Explanation
IPC Section 113 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the liability of an abettor when the act’s effect differs from the effect intended by the abettor. This section ensures that abettors are held accountable for unintended but foreseeable consequences of their actions. Here’s how Section 113 operates:
- Unintended Effects: If an abettor abets an act with a specific intention, but the act leads to a different effect that the abettor did not specifically intend, the abettor is still liable if the other effect is a direct consequence of the abetted act.
- Liability Based on Direct Consequence: The essential condition here is that the unintended effect must be a direct consequence of the act that was abetted. The abettor is liable for these effects as though they had intended them, provided they are direct and natural outcomes of the act.
- Punishment: The abettor can be punished for the actual effect caused, similar to how they would be penalised if that effect had been their original intention. This provision ensures that abettors cannot limit their liability to only those outcomes they subjectively intended.
- Broadening Accountability: Section 113 extends the scope of accountability for abettors by making them responsible for their intended outcomes and other significant effects that naturally arise from the acts they encourage or facilitate.
This section plays a crucial role in the criminal justice system by ensuring that abettors cannot escape liability due to technicalities regarding their intentions, especially when their actions lead to severe and direct consequences they did not precisely foresee but are natural outcomes of their abetment.
