Explain the Law Relating to Abetment under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 – With Examples

Synopsis

• Meaning of Abetment
• Relevant Provisions: IPC vs BNS (Comparative Table)
• Forms of Abetment
  • Instigation
  • Conspiracy
  • Intentional Aid
• Essential Ingredients of Abetment
• Punishments for Abetment under BNS 2023
• Examples for Better Understanding
• Important Case Laws
  • Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618
  • Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) (2009) 16 SCC 605
  • S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & Anr. (2010) 12 SCC 190
• Conclusion

Meaning of Abetment

Under Section 107 IPC and under Section 56 BNS: Abetment means helping, encouraging, or facilitating another person to commit an offence. In simple words, a person who motivates, plans with, or assists the main offender is said to “abet” the crime.

Relevant Provisions: IPC vs BNS

Definition of Abetment:

• Section 107 IPC
• Section 56 BNS

Punishment for Abetment:

• Section 109 IPC
• Section 58 BNS

Abetment of Suicide:

• Section 306 IPC
• Section 104 BNS

Abetment of Suicide of Woman / Minor:

• Section 306 IPC & 305 IPC
• Section 105 BNS

Forms of Abetment (Section 107 IPC / Section 56 BNS)

According to both IPC and BNS, abetment may be committed in three ways:

(A) Instigation: Instigation means provoking, suggesting, or pressurising another person to commit an offence. It includes words, gestures, hints, threats, and even silent approval.

Example:

1) A repeatedly tells B, “You are weak. No one cares for you. Better you kill yourself.” If B commits suicide, A is guilty under Section 104 BNS (Abetment of suicide).

2) Asking someone repeatedly to burn a shop or threatening them to assault someone.

(B) Conspiracy: Two or more persons agreeing to do an illegal act, or agreeing to do a legal act by illegal means. In BNS (Section 56), an act or illegal omission must occur in pursuance of the conspiracy.

Example:

1) A and B plan to kidnap C. A arranges the car; B brings ropes. Even if the kidnapping fails, both are guilty of abetment under Section 56 BNS.

2) Three persons planning to steal jewellery, and one of them arranging tools for night theft.

(C) Intentional Aid: When someone intentionally helps, facilitates, or provides assistance necessary for the commission of an offence. This includes supplying tools, giving shelter, giving instructions, or providing financial help.

Example:

1) A provides a duplicate key to B knowing he will commit theft. A is liable for abetment under Section 56 BNS.

2) Giving a weapon knowing it will be used for murder.

Essential Ingredients of Abetment

1. There must be an abettor
2. There must be an abetted act/offence
3. There must be intention, knowledge, or active involvement
4. Connection between abettor’s act and offence
5. Commission of the offence is not always necessary
   • Even if the main offence is not actually committed, abetment is punishable.

Punishment for Abetment (BNS Section 49 / IPC Section 109)

BNS Section 49 deals with the punishment for abetment where the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no separate provision for punishment is made elsewhere in the Sanhita.

• The abettor shall be punished with the same punishment provided for the offence that was committed.

Key Examples

Example 1: A instigates B to give false evidence in court. B, following the instigation, commits that offence. A is guilty of abetting the offence of giving false evidence and will receive the same punishment as B for the offence.

Example 2: A, intending to commit murder, instigates B, a child under seven years of age (who is exempt from criminal liability), to administer a poisonous drink to Z. B does so, and Z dies. A is liable to be punished in the same manner as if B had been capable of committing the offence of murder.

Example 3: A and B conspire to poison Z. A procures the poison and delivers it to B. B administers the poison to Z in A’s absence, causing Z’s death. A is guilty of abetting the murder of Z by conspiracy and is liable to the punishment for murder.

Example 4: A instigates B to commit murder. B refuses to do so and does not commit the murder. A has nonetheless committed the offence of abetment. The punishment, in this case, would be different, usually a fraction of the maximum punishment for the abetted offence, as per BNS Section 56.

Example 5: A hires a person B to kill C. A pays the money and provides the weapon. Even if B is caught before the act, A is guilty of abetment to murder under Section 58 BNS.

Example 6: A security guard deliberately ignores an intruder because he was paid for it. He is guilty of abetment by intentional aid (illegal omission).

Important Case Laws

1) Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618

Facts

• The deceased was the wife of the accused.
• Before committing suicide, she had a quarrel with her husband.
• The accused allegedly told her: “If you want to die, go and die.”
• She later consumed poison and died.
• The trial court convicted the accused for abetment of suicide.

Issues

1. Whether the mere use of harsh words or a casual remark amounts to “instigation” under abetment laws?
2. Whether the accused had the mens rea (intention) to provoke or encourage the suicide?

Analysis

• The Supreme Court held that instigation must involve active encouragement or intentional provocation.
• A single remark said in anger, without intention to push someone towards suicide, does not amount to abetment.
• The Court clarified that there must be a direct link between the accused’s behaviour and the suicide.

Judgment

• The Supreme Court acquitted the husband.
• The Court held that the statement was made in a moment of anger and lacked the intention or mens rea required for abetment.
• Thus, no offence under Section 306 IPC was made out.

2) Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) (2009) 16 SCC 605

Facts

• The accused was a property dealer.
• He had allegedly pressurised and mentally harassed the deceased over a financial dispute.
• The victim committed suicide and left behind statements blaming the accused.
• The accused was charged with abetment of suicide.

Issues

1. What is the meaning of “instigation” under Section 107 IPC / Section 56 BNS?
2. Does continuous mental pressure constitute abetment?

Analysis

• The Court analysed the word “instigate”, holding that it means:
  to goad, provoke, incite or encourage a person to do an act.
• Even silence or indirect acts can amount to instigation if they intentionally push a person towards suicide.
• However, the Court also stated that every harassment or stress does not amount to abetment.
• There must be a clear intention on the part of the accused to make the deceased commit suicide.

Judgment

• The Court held that abetment must be assessed on the basis of the accused’s intention and behaviour pattern.
• Since the evidence did not show direct instigation or deliberate aid, the conviction was not sustainable.
• The accused was given the benefit of doubt.

3) S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & Anr. (2010) 12 SCC 190

Facts

• The deceased, a police constable, shot himself with his service rifle.
• The allegation was that his superior officer (accused) had scolded him and was strict in his duties.
• Family members claimed that the harassment by the senior officer forced him to commit suicide.
• The officer was charged under Section 306 IPC.

Issues

1. Whether normal disciplinary action by a superior can amount to abetment of suicide?
2. Whether “harassment” without intent can be treated as abetment?

Analysis

• The Supreme Court held that abetment requires a positive act or intentional omission directly leading to suicide.
• Strict supervision, disciplinary control, or routine official rebukes do not constitute abetment.
• The Court emphasised that mens rea (intent) is essential.
• The behaviour of the accused must be such that a reasonable person would be compelled to commit suicide.

Judgment

• The Court quashed the charges against the accused officer.
• It ruled that there was no evidence of intentional provocation or encouragement.
• Routine discipline in the workplace cannot be stretched to mean instigation or abetment.

Conclusion

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 keeps the core principles of abetment the same as the Indian Penal Code but makes the language clearer and the punishment structure more streamlined. Abetment covers instigation, conspiracy, and intentional aid, and the abettor is usually punished just like the main offender. Special emphasis is placed on abatement of suicide with stricter provisions.