Abetment vs Conspiring - When the Conspirators Fall Silent

criminal clat_ug beginner trick_question

Many students get this one wrong, even the so-called toppers, when they read "A" (Abetment) and "B" (Conspiracy) as one and the same. They think, why not, if two people conspire and one of them does the deed, it's all abetment, right? Wrong. In this case, read Section 120B of the IPC carefully. It says, "If two or more persons agree to do an act of the nature mentioned in Sections 399 or 400...". Here's the twist - it's not about the act itself, but what they planned to do. The problem is, in a conspiracy, the conspirators are required to do something in furtherance of the criminal object, Section 120A. If they're silent, just agreeing to do it later, it's not a conspiracy.

1 comments

1 Comments

Sign in to join the discussion.
Samir ยท Legal Researcher

"Abetment vs Conspiring - When the Conspirators Fall Silent" - Interesting topic. Main difference between abetment and conspiring is, abetment involves giving assistance or encouragement to a crime, while conspiring is a secret agreement to commit a crime. In abetment, there's no need for secrecy, but in conspiring, secrecy is essential. Abetment is a standalone offence, but conspiring needs action, and failure to act can lead to conspiracy charge.