What is Section 34 IPC Bare Act?
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code Bare Act is the exact text of the Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (Section 34 IPC), passed by the Indian legislature or Parliament. Thus, it is a replica of the original Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC 34) available to the people of India by the Indian legislature or Parliament.
Section 34 IPC Bare Act
1[ 34 . Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.— When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.]
Section 34 IPC Explanation
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code states that when a criminal act is committed by several individuals, and it is clear that it was done with a common intention among them, then each of such individuals shall be held liable for the act in the same manner as if it was done by him alone. In other words, if two or more people jointly commit a crime, they are each responsible for the entire crime and can be charged as if they had acted alone.
Common Intention
This IPC Section states that “Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention” that is, when a criminal act is committed by several individuals, it is considered to be done by each of them in furtherance of a common intention, then each of such individuals shall be held liable for the act in the same manner as if it was done by him alone.
The common intention, under Section IPC 34, refers to a prior plan among the individuals to commit the crime. It is important to note that common intention does not require an agreement. In other words, it can be judged from the circumstances of the case and the acts of the accused.
Evidence Required
To establish the existence of common intention under this IPC Section, the prosecution must provide evidence that the accused had a prior agreement or plan to commit the crime and that they acted in furtherance of that common intention. The evidence may be direct or circumstantial and can include statements, actions, or other conduct of the accused before, during, or after the committing of the crime.
Joint Liability
Once the existence of common intention under this IPC Section has been proved, each individual involved in the commission of the crime will be held jointly liable for the entire crime, regardless of the extent of their individual participation. This means that even if one of the individuals played a minor role in the crime, they will be held equally responsible for the entire crime as the other individuals.
What are The Essential of IPC 34
- More than one accused should be involved in the crime
- All the accused should have a common intention of crime
- You should have evidence of the crime done by accused
- Other IPC section must be charged with this IPC Section 34
- Date and time of the crime should be mentioned in the F.I.R or plaint / complaint.
- All accused name should be mentioned in the F.I.R or plaint / complaint.
- The criminal act done by each accused should be mentioned in the F.I.R or plaint / complaint in detail with evidence.
- Section 120B of IPC can be charged against all accused because the intention of the crime of all accused is same but you have to prove that all accused has done criminal conspiracy against you with evidence.
- Based on the nature / type of the crime, other IPC Section can be charged against all accused with this IPC Section 34.
- It is not essential that all the accused will commit same crime but it is essential that all the accused should have a common intention of crime under Section IPC 34.
- Most important, false allegations and false IPC section must not be charged against any innocent people.
What is Punishment for Section 34 IPC?
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code does not prescribe a specific punishment. It is a principle of joint liability that establishes the liability of individuals involved in a criminal act done in furtherance of a common intention.
When an offense is committed by several persons with a common intention, each person is held liable for that offense as if they individually committed it. The punishment for the underlying offense to which Section 34 IPC is applied would be determined by the relevant provisions of the IPC that define that specific offense.
Therefore, the punishment for an offense under IPC Section would depend on the nature of the offense committed and the corresponding punishment prescribed for that offense under the IPC.
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code does not define or tell about punishment. Punishment is decided on the basis of other IPC section charged with this section IPC 34.
There is no punishment defined for Sec 34 but if you charge section 120B IPC with this IPC Section, then there is punishment for criminal conspiracy, which as aforesaid is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both.
You cannot file a case in court or can not register F.I.R in Police Station only under this section IPC 34 because punishment is not defined under this section IPC 34 . This section IPC 34 should be charged on accused along with other IPC section according to the offense committed by the accused.
IPC 34 states that all persons have committed an offense with the same intention and therefore each accused should be punished with the same punishment (equal liability and equal punishment) as if he had committed the crime alone.
Section 34 IPC Example
Example 1: If two individuals are involved in a theft, and it is established that they acted with a common intention to steal, each individual will be held liable for the entire theft, even if one of them had a minor role in the crime. This is because their common intention to commit the theft makes each of them equally responsible for the entire crime under IPC 34.
Example 2: Suppose 10 persons came to kill person “A”. All 10 persons have the same intention to kill Person “A”, but 9 persons just threatened Person “A” and one person tried to kill Person “A”.
In this case only one person will be punished for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC as per the Indian law and all other 9 persons shall be punished separately under IPC section charged against them as per the offense committed by them (accused).
But Person “A” wants full justice as all 10 persons had the same intention to kill Person “A” and Person “A” wants punishment of attempt to murder for all 10 accused.
In that case person “A” should file a case in the court or register a F.I.R against all 10 persons (accused) under section 307 IPC that is attempt to murder with this IPC Section 34.
Is IPC 34 bailable?
Since Section 34 IPC does not define a specific offense, it does not have a specific classification of being bailable or non-bailable. The bailability of an offense depends on the specific offense committed in conjunction with Section IPC 34.
Punishment is not defined under this IPC Section, So this Section IPC 34 is neither bailable nor non-bailable. But you can say that bailable nor non-bailable is completely depend on the other IPC section charged with this IPC Section 34 .
If this Section IPC 34 charged with other non-bailable IPC Section then you can consider this Section 34 IPC as a non-bailable for all accused.
If this IPC Section 34 charged only with other bailable IPC section then you can consider this Section 34 IPC as a bailable for all accused.
Is IPC 34 Compoundable or Not?
IPC 34 does not define a specific offense, it does not have a specific provision regarding compoundable or not. The compoundability of an offense depends on the specific offense committed in conjunction with this IPC Section.
As Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code does not tell about the type of crime and punishment of crime. Thus, This IPC Section is neither compoundable nor non-compoundable.
Compoundable refers to the ability of parties involved in a criminal case to reach a mutual agreement and settle the dispute, thereby withdrawing the case. Compoundable or not is completely depend on the other IPC section charged with this IPC Section 34.
Section 34 IPC Cognizable or Not?
Section 34 IPC does not define a specific offense but deals with the principle of joint liability, it does not fall under the classification of cognizable or non-cognizable offenses. The nature and classification of the underlying offense to which this IPC Section is applied will determine whether it is cognizable or non-cognizable.
This IPC Section is not categorized as cognizable or non-cognizable in itself. The categorization of an offense under the IPC as cognizable or non-cognizable is determined by the nature and severity of the offense, as specified in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Section 34 IPC Judgments / Rulings
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA : KRISHNAMURTHY @ GUNODU VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA, CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 288 OF 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 6893 OF 2021)
This appeal by Krishnamurthy (also described as Krishna Murthy), Gopala and Thimmappa takes exception to the judgment dated 20th February 2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 200147 of 2017, whereby the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, has affirmed their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 and individually for the offences under Sections 447, 504, 506 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’).
Having examined the evidence in detail, we agree that Krishnamurthy has been rightly convicted under the aforesaid Sections, including Section 302 of the IPC. Testimonies of Channamma (PW-1), Ramanjaneya (PW-4), Dullaiah (PW-6) and Dodda Narasimha (PW-7), all eyewitnesses, implicate Krishnamurthy as the perpetrator who had assaulted the deceased-Venkatarama after he had fallen down. In view of our analysis of the testimonies in the ensuing paragraphs, we have reservations in entirely relying upon the depositions of Dullaiah (PW-6) and Dodda Narasimha (PW-7).
……………….
……………….
……………….
The appeal is, accordingly, partly allowed in the aforesaid terms. Read More…
Summary
In conclusion, This IPC Section tells about joint liability in cases where a criminal act is committed by multiple individuals acting in furtherance of a common intention. This section holds that each person involved in the commission of a crime is responsible for the entire crime and can be charged as if he or she had acted alone.
1. Subs. by Act 27 of 1870, s. 1, for section 34.