Section 149 ipc. IPC 149 Section of Indian Penal Code 2022-11-06
Section 149 ipc Rating:
6,3/10
530
reviews
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of unlawful assembly. An unlawful assembly is defined as a group of five or more people who come together with the common intention of committing a crime or disturbing the public peace.
Under section 149, if any member of an unlawful assembly does an act with the common intention of the assembly, then each member of the assembly is deemed to have committed the same act. This means that all members of the assembly can be held equally responsible for any action taken by any member of the assembly.
For example, if a group of six people come together with the intention of committing a theft, and one member of the group actually carries out the theft, then all six members can be held equally responsible for the theft under section 149.
One of the main purposes of this section is to deter people from joining or participating in unlawful assemblies. It is intended to send a message that anyone who takes part in such assemblies will be held accountable for the actions of the group.
However, it should be noted that in order to be found guilty under section 149, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual was a member of the unlawful assembly and had the common intention of the assembly. Simply being present at the scene of the crime or being associated with the other members of the assembly is not sufficient to establish guilt under this section.
In summary, section 149 of the IPC is a legal provision that holds members of an unlawful assembly equally responsible for any actions taken by the group, with the intention of deterring people from participating in such assemblies.
News: Alteration of Conviction from Section 149 IPC To Section 34 IPC: Only after proving 'Common Intention' : Supreme Court
C in addition to earlier implication under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 504 I. Formation of unlawful assembly having its common object and knowledge of common object are matters of fact which are required to be proved by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt for securing conviction of an accused under Section 149 I. State of Kerala, 2011 9 SCC 257. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—The same as for the offence—According as offence is cognizable or non-cognizable—According as offence is bailable or non-bailable—Triable by court by which the offence is triable—Non-compoundable. This has been recently addressed by the courts and they interpreted the provision in a strict manner so as to prevent the conviction of any innocent. When the Indian Penal Code of 1860 was enacted by the British, Section 149 was inserted to suppress any revolt by the people of India against the British.
Section 149 IPC Is One Of The Most Misused And Misinterpreted Provisions Of The Present Times: Allahabad High Court
The edifice of Section 149 I. Therefore, it is not justified for the individuals in an assembly who were mere spectators in the offence to be equally punishable with the accused who committed serious crimes. C defines unlawful assembly to be an assembly of five or more persons. COMMENTS i It is well settled that once a membership of an unlawful assembly is established, it is not incumbent on the prosecution to establish whether any specific overt act has been assigned to any accused. An offence committed to achieving the common object would generally be the offence that the members of the assembly knew was likely to be committed.
The first part of the Section states that the offence must be committed with a view to accomplishing the common object. Given that earlier the appellants had been ordered to serve their two sentences of five years under Section 307 and one year under Section 148 of IPC concurrently, acquittal in the latter would effectively have no impact on their outstanding period of sentence. As a sequel to the above discussion, both the appeals are found to be without any merit so far as conviction of the appellants under Section 307 IPC is concerned, and are dismissed accordingly. The bench said that even though the charge is under Section 302 read with Section 149 but the facts state that there has been a fatality due to the act committed by a particular accused. Lawyers relevant to the practice and location will notify on your case in real time basis. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229- A of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) , its elements & scope
SoOLEGAL will retain, in addition to its net Fees, an amount equal to the legally applicable withholding taxes at the applicable rate. There is allegation in the first information report that uncle of informant, Mukesh Agarwal, was sitting on pavement of his house and talking to one, Swadesh, when co-accused, Deepesh Sethiya, came on his Scorpio car and co-accused, Shubham Tamrakar, came out of the car and directed one car standing to be removed and he started abusing. The Court observed that it cannot be presumed that the said person shares the common object with other accused who killed the victim. Keeping this view, the HC added a short note of caution for the judges that in such instances, the prosecution case should be able to assure that all the direct and indirect facts lead to a common share of knowledge, otherwise they should not implicate the accused. Section 34 and 149 of the IPC are modes for apportioning vicarious liability on the individual members of a group, there exist a few important differences between these two provisions. Therefore, the accused who killed the victim was liable and not the rest of the members since the common object was not to kill.
It appears to be case of sudden provocation and all the members of the alleged unlawful assembly cannot be held liable for the offence committed by any one or two accused named in the first information report. The Bench has also very candidly conceded that Section 149 IPC is one of the most misused and misinterpreted provisions of the present times. In a rare candid admission, the Bench then conceded in para 10 that: At the stage of consideration of bail application the court is required to rely upon the material collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of his investigation. SoOLEGAL shall keep all information furnished by you including your personal data, banking information, matters due to which you are seeking professional service and any sensitive information in confidentiality at all times. The version of accused side, as usual, is missing. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. Subsequently, father of the informant, Ashok Agarwal, died and implication of the accused persons was also made under Section 302 I.
Section 149 IPC assigns liability merely by membership of the unlawful assembly: Supreme Court
Thus it must be shown that the person was not only present but had also participated in commission of that offence. By Dec 8, 2021 Definition — Every member of unlawful assembly guity of offence committed in prosecution of common object — If an offence is committed by an member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of common object of that assembly, or such as the member of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object, every person who at the time of committing of that offence is a member of the same assembly, is guity of that offence. To put things in perspective, the Bench then envisages in para 2 that: In the first information report eight persons, including the applicant, have been implicated for causing the offence of attempt to murder, rioting armed with deadly weapons and forming illegal assembly for prosecution of a common object of murder. This provision is very crucial in making members of an unlawful assembly liable for the commission of an offence but sometimes there have been cases where innocent people have been charged under this Section. The exclusive jurisdiction will be with the courts at New Delhi regarding any dispute with SoOLEGAL relating in any way to the Terms and Conditions or your use of the Services. Do note, the Bench points out in para 8 that: Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions. In one of the cases, a person was convicted under Section 149 for murdering a person.
Allahabad High Court Labelled Section 149 IPC as Most Misuses and Misunderstood Provisions of Present Times.
C stands on substratum of Sections 141 I. Your use of service is completely at your own risk. When one of the accused has committed the alleged offence then the other members of the unlawful assembly should not unnecessarily be punished with imprisonment for life, without there being any contribution of other members with the common object besides, such members can be punished separately for minor offences under Relevant case laws with respect to Section 149 IPC Vinubhai Ranchhodbhai Patel v. In case the charge under Section 34 IPC is held not made out for want of evidence and further when the charge under Section 149 is already held not made out by the High Court, whether any case against three accused persons appellants herein is made out for their conviction and, if so, for which offence? The advance amount will be refunded to you without any interest if the assigned task is not received in SoOLEGAL Repository by the Consultant. WE AND OUR AFFILIATES WAIVE AND DISCLAIM: 1 ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, DECLARATIONS OR GUARANTEES REGARDING THE SERVICES OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES, DECLARATIONS OR GUARANTEES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-INFRINGEMENT; 2 IMPLIED WARRANTIES ARISING OUT OF COURSE OF DEALING, COURSE OF PERFORMANCE OR USAGE OF TRADE; AND 3 ANY OBLIGATION, LIABILITY, RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY IN TORT, WHETHER OR NOT ARISING FROM OUR NEGLIGENCE. They must have a common object, amongst others, to commit any mischief or criminal trespass, or other offence. The Bench further stated that it is very difficult to conduct a free and impartial investigation of a crime or case due to the influence of money, which is quite obvious in this particular case.
Case title —Sanjeev Kallu Sethiya v. This article is written by Simran Mohanty , a student of Fairfield Institute of Management and Technology affiliated with Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi. State 2022 the Delhi High Court said that there needs to be a clear finding with regards to the nature of the unlawful common object to convict an accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and if there is no such finding, then just the presence of accused would not be sufficient to prove the common object. However, their conviction under Section 148 is set aside. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Later on in the appeal, he was acquitted because he had just revealed the location of the victim to the mob who killed the victim.
As now, when the accused approached the court seeking bail, the court happened to notice that, by looking at the case, the accused persons had not in fact had the common intention of causing the murder of the deceased, because the dispute took place all of a sudden, hence failing to fulfil one of the prerequisite requirements under Section 149 of the IPC. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. C as it suits them. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. The knowledge of the commission of the offence though difficult can be inferred from the circumstances such as the background of the incident, the motive, the nature of the assembly and arms carried by the members of the assembly, their common object, and the behaviour of the members soon before, at or after the actual commission of the crime.
Suitability of Section 149 IPC and Fundamental Rights: A review
Any taxes applicable in addition to the fee payable to SoOLEGAL shall be added to the invoiced amount as per applicable Law at the invoicing date which shall be paid by you. Thus, the charge under Section 149 would be maintainable even though it was against less than 5 persons and other accused could not be identified but in total, they should be more than 5 persons. The aggressors further pronounced that they would not rest till they murdered the complainant. The article discusses Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with the help of various judicial precedents. The accused filed an appeal in the High Court. Active participation of the members in the commission or the planning of the act must be there. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs.
