Code
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 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.
Illustrations
(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.
Explain it
Section 111 deals with the situation where an individual instigates, aids, or encourages another person to commit a specific offense, but the person actually commits a different offense that is more serious than the abetted offense. Even though the instigator did not intend for the more serious offense to be committed, they will still be held liable for it.
In essence, this section ensures that an abettor cannot escape responsibility for the more serious consequences of their instigation, even if the actual act committed deviates from their initial intention.
3. Illustrate it
Example:
A person (A) instigates another person (B) to commit theft of a mobile phone (a less serious offense). However, B, in the course of the act, ends up killing the owner of the phone (a more serious offense). A, despite not intending the murder, can be held liable under Section 111 for the murder committed by B.
Common Questions and Answers
Q: What if the act done is less serious than the abetted act?
A: In this case, Section 111 will not apply. The abettor will only be held liable for the less serious act that was actually done.
Q: Can the abettor be held liable even if they were not present at the scene of the crime?
A: Yes, the abettor’s physical presence at the crime scene is not a requirement. As long as the instigation or encouragement is proven, they can be held liable.
Q: What are the defenses available against Section 111?
A: Some possible defenses include proving that the abettor did not intend for the more serious offense to be committed or that the actual act was not of the same kind as the abetted act.
