Criminal Intention: The Devil's in the Details
criminal general intermediate doubtYaar, I'm so confused. Chapter 3 in my BSNL notes has got me all muddled up. They've been using the terms "abettor as a party to the criminal act" and "abettor other than a party to that criminal act". Please help. According to Section 107 IPC, a person abets another to do a criminal act if they instigate or incite that person to commit the act. Then why do we need two separate terms? In the first case, the abettor is actually a part of the criminal act, whereas in the second, they're just inciting someone else. The definitions in the Criminal Law textbooks seem to overlap. Can someone please clarify these concepts and help me figure out when to use which term?
1 comments
1 Comments
Sign in to join the discussion.
Bhaiya, meri aapko shubhkamnayein! I agree, criminal intention is a grey area. It's not just about thinking of a crime, but also about the mens rea - whether the intention was specific or general. Take the case of Shaji Kumar vs. State of Kerala 1992; intention was a crucial factor. What do you guys think about the distinction between intent and knowledge in criminal law? Kya aapke vichar?