Section 34 CPC: A Colonial Anomaly Still Standing

cpc clat_pg intermediate reform_idea

Yaar, have you ever thought Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is straight outta the colonial era? It says that for an act to be considered 'done by all' under S. 34, it needs to be an 'illegal' or 'wrongful' combination of their acts, implying the intention behind it was common. But what if the acts were done in good faith? Why should they still be held liable? It's like saying a cricket team is responsible for the entire team's act of celebrating a wicket just because 1-2 overzealous teammates did a dance move that hurt someone. It's not fair. This provision is super outdated and needs to be revised to align with modern law thinking. In 2025, we need clarity and not ambiguity. This is something we need to discuss in our CLAT PG / AILET PG prep.

1 comments

1 Comments

Sign in to join the discussion.
Sonam ยท LLB Aspirant

Yaar, Section 34 CPC is indeed a relic of colonial legacy still haunting us. It makes joint liability of parents for their minor child's wrongful act, without any mens rea. I think it's outdated and should be relooked. Why should parents be punished for their child's actions, if they didn't instigate or abet? It's time to reform this draconian provision!