In our society, a crime often takes place which are against the principle of
humanity. A person convicted for a crime has a certain criminal liability. The
general principles i.e. Actus reus and Mens rea, play significant role in
deciding criminal liability.
There are lots of evils in our society, one among them is crime. There is no
universal accepted definition of crime, however certain acts of an individual or
group of people, which harm the people or disturb peace and tranquility of the
society can be termed as crimes. The person, who commits a crime, is punished as
per law, so that such activities do not repeat in future. In general, following
acts can be considered as a crime like attack on public order, abuses or
obstructions of public property, causing injuries to public, attacking
individuals and annexing their rights, attack upon the property of individuals,
or upon rights associated with, etc.
Thus, crime can be of dual nature i.e.
civil or criminal. Sometimes, a crime in one country may not be crime in any
other country, as crime is decided by the statute of the nation. According to
sociologist, a crime can be against human body, property, public place,
religion, and family, morals of society and conservation of resources of
Definitions of Crime
According to Sir William Blackstone
, "Crime is an act committed or
omitted in Violation of public law forbidding or commanding it."
According to Sergeant Stephen
, "A crime is a violation of right,
considered in reference to the civil tendency of violation as regards the
According to John Gillin
, "An act that has shown to be actually harmful
to Society or that is believed to be socially harmful by a group of people that
has the power to enforce its beliefs, and that places such an act under the ban
of positive penalties."
According to Prof. SW Keeton
, "A crime today would seem to be any
undesirable act, which the State finds most convenient to correct by the
institution of proceeding for the infliction of a penalty, instead of leaving
the remedy to the discretion of some injured person."
According to Section 40 of the IPC, "An offence denotes a thing made punishable
by the code."
According to Halsbury's Law of England
, "A crime is an unlawful act or
default which is an offence against the public and renders the person guilty of
the act or default liable to legal punishment."
According to BA Wrotley
, "A crime is an offence against the law, and is
usually an offence against morality, against a man's social duty to his fellow
being members of society; it renders the offender liable to punishment."
When a person do or perform certain act, there can be positive, negative or
neutral consequences. A person is liable for consequences of his/her act. In
law, criminal liability can be defined as a liability or responsibility of a
person, for a crime when he or she has acted with criminal intent, as opposed to
acting accidentally or lacking the ability to act deliberately.
If liability is proven in court, then one will be sentenced accordingly. In
deciding criminal liability, the actus reus and the mens rea play a chief role.
General Principles of Criminal Liability
There are two general principles of criminal liability i.e. Actus reus and Mens
These are discussed below:
Actus reus is the first general principle of criminal liability. It is a Latin
term, which means 'guilty act'. It is also referred as the external element or
the objective element of a crime. According to statute, it refers to the act or
omission that comprises the physical elements of a crime.
In his criminal law, Glanville Williams stated that "actus reus includes all the
external circumstances and consequences specified in the rule of law as
constituting the forbidden situation."
Therefore, we can say that it include everything except mental element. It
consists of both positive and negative elements.
The characteristics and constituents of actus reus are decided by the criminal
law of the country, that's why they vary from one country to another. Definition
of crime, as adopted by the law plays a very significant role in deciding
requirement of actus reus.
Principle of Actus Reus in the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Offences related with the principle of actus reus, in the Indian Penal Code are
- Place: Section 441 to 462 of the IPC, deals with the various offences
related with places, which include criminal trespass, house trespass and
breaking, dishonestly breaking open respectable containing property, etc
- Time: Section 456 to 458 of the IPC contains offences of lurking trespass or
house-breaking by night in order to commit an offence. Such offence fall in
category of actus reus in respect of both place and time.
- Person: Section 359 to 374 of the IPC contains offences of kidnapping and
abduction, procuring of minor girls etc, such offence is actus reus in respect
of the person.
- Consent: The offences which take place without consent are also included
in actus reus. Example of such offences is rape, non-consensual penetration, etc.
- Possession: Possession of stolen property constitute the actus reus (Section
410 to 412 of IPC) and mere possession of certain things amount to actus reus of
the offence under Section 233 to 235, 257, 242, 243, 259 and 266 of IPC.
- Preparation: Actus reus also includes preparation to commit an offence under
Section 122, 126 and 399 of IPC.
Mens rea is another general principle of the criminal liability. It is a Latin
word which means 'guilty mind', just opposite of actus reus. In Laymen language,
it can be defined as a mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime.
Mental condition is one of the basic ingredients for committing a crime.
Therefore, we can say that mens rea is motive force behind the criminal act. The
degree of mens rea varies from one crime to another. In the cases of murder,
forcible sexual assault, stealing property, homicide, etc, there was intention
in the mind of culprit to commit these offences.
The doctrine of mens rea is based on the latin maxim actus non facit reum nisi
mens sit rea, which means 'the act does not make one guilty unless the mind is
also guilty'. According to this maxim, physical action is not sufficient to
constitute a crime. Moreover, propounder of mens rea has acknowledged that every
person has the capacity to choose between right and wrong. An Individual can
utilize his wisdom and prudence to choose the right direction. After making
choice, he has to take responsibility for the same. Human beings are born free
and they have freedom to act freely.
Principle of Mens Rea in the Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Indian Penal Code does not explicitly mention offences related with the
principle of mens rea. However, there are certain words used in different
offences which indicate element of mens rea. These words are wrongful gain or
wrongful loss, dishonestly, fraudulently, reason to believe, criminal knowledge
or intention, intentional cooperation, voluntarily, malignantly, wantonly,
maliciously, etc. The general exceptions embodied in the Chapter IV of the IPC
include acts which, otherwise would constitute an offence, ceases to be so under
certain circumstances set out in this chapter.
Types of Criminal Liability
Criminal liability can be categorized into three types i.e. individual, group
and constructive liability, which are as follows:
Individual Criminal Liability
An offence or unlawful activity can be committed by an individual or group of
individuals. When an individual commit a crime, he/she is responsible for
criminal liability of a committed crime.
For example, there are four friends A, B, C and D. They live in a same flat, and
study in same college. One day, A beats D because of some issue between them. In
this case, A will be liable for unlawful act, B and C will not have any
liability. Hence, case of A is perfect example of an individual criminal
Group Criminal Liability or Joint Liability
Group criminal liability is just contradictory to individual criminal liability.
In crimes, where two or more people are involved in the commission of crime, in
such cases all the people are liable for committing a crime. In group liability,
along with direct participant, indirect participants are also caught, though
punishment in crime, committed by group, can be same for all or different based
on their role in the crime.
Most of the planned or organized crimes come under the category of group
criminal liability. In the Indian Penal Code, 1860, provisions regarding group
liability have been covered under joint liability. Section 34 to 38 of the IPC,
1860, embodies the principle of joint liability in committing crime.
Acts Done by Several Persons in Furtherance of Common Intention (Section 34)
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 35 of the Act
This section covers 'An act which is criminal by reason of its being done with a
criminal knowledge or intention'.
As per the provisions of this section, whenever an act, which is criminal only
by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge or intention, is done by
several persons, each of such persons who joins in the act with such knowledge
or intention is liable for the act in the same manner as if the act were done by
him alone with that knowledge or intention.
Effect Caused Partly by Act and Partly by Omission (Section 36)
Wherever the causing of a certain effect, or an attempt to cause that effect, by
an act or by an omission, is an offence, it is to be understood that the causing
of that effect partly by an act and partly by an omission is the same offence.
For example, A intentionally causes Z's death, partly by illegally omitting to
give Z food, and partly by beating Z. A has committed murder.
Co-operation by Doing One of Several Acts Constituting an Offence (Section 37)
When an offence is committed by means of several acts, whoever intentionally
co-operates in the commission of that offence by doing anyone of those acts,
either singly or jointly with any other person, commits that offence.
For example, A and B agree to murder Z by severally and at different times
giving him small doses of poison. A and B administer the poison according to the
agreement with intent to murder Z. Z dies from the effects of the several doses
of poison, so administered to him. Here, A and B intentionally co-operate in the
commission of murder and as each of them does an act by which the death is
caused, they are both guilty of the offence though their acts are separate.
Persons Concerned in Criminal Act may be Guilty of Different Offences (Section
Where several persons are engaged or concerned in the commission of a criminal
act, they may be guilty of different offences by means of that act.
For example, A attacks Z under such circumstances of grave provocation that his
killing of Z would only be culpable homicide not amounting to murder. B, having
ill-will towards Z and intending to kill him, and not having been subject to the
provocation, assists A in killing Z.
Here, though A and B are both engaged in causing Z's death, B is guilty of
murder, and A is guilty only of culpable homicide.
Constructive liability is quite similar to the group or joint liability. It is
based on the principle that a person is liable, in law, for the consequences of
an act of another, even though he has not done it himself. Many times, it has
been found that a person who committed crime was just an instrument, while
actual and principal offender was another person. A case of an abetment is
perfect example of constructive liability.
In Alauddin Mian v. State of Bihar
case, explaining the importance of Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the
Supreme Court has observed that this section creates constructive liability and
makes every member of the unlawful assembly, liable for the offence or offences
committed in the course of the occurrence, provided that the same was/were
committed in prosecution of the common object or was/were such as the members of
that assembly knew to be likely to be committed.
In Rama Pasi and Another v.
State of U.P.
case, court held that Section 149 prescribes for vicarious or
constructive criminal liability for all members of an unlawful assembly, where
an offence is committed by any member of such an unlawful assembly in
prosecution of the common object of that assembly or such as the members of that
assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object.
Moreover, a person may be constructively liable for an offence under following
sections of IPC
- Under Section 34, Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common
- Under Section 121A, being a member of a conspiracy to commit such an
- Under Section 141, being a member of an unlawful assembly, the members
whereof knew that an offence was likely to be committed. It include to
resist the execution of any law, or of any legal progress, to overawe by
criminal forces, or show of criminal force, to commit any mischief or
criminal trespass, to take any person or property in possession and to
compel any person to do what he is not legally bound to do.
Stages of Crime
Committing a crime is a full-fledged process consisting of several stages,
though there are some exceptions to it, when some criminal activities take place
immediately on a spot. In premeditated crimes, there are four distinct stages
which are as follows:
It is the first stage in the commission of a crime; it is also referred as the
mental and psycho stage. In this stage, person (offender) decides that he has to
do some criminal act. Moreover, offender decides the motive and chalks out plan
for committing a crime. Many intellectuals name this stage as contemplation
stage. No law in world, contain any provision for punishing a person who has
generated intention for doing some criminal act, as it is mental concept, which
cannot be proved in court.
After intention, stage of preparation comes, which plays an instrumental role in
the commission of a crime. In this stage, an offender arranges the necessary
resources for the execution of the intentional criminal act.
For example, if a person wants to kill another person, because of any reason, in
preparatory stage, that person can make arrangement for weapon, hire people or
any other thing depending on his capacity.
Usually, a preparation to commit a crime is not punishable, however in certain
cases, it can be punishable, such as preparation to wage war against the
government (Section 122), against friendly foreign country (Section 126) and to
commit robbery or dacoity (Section 399).
Attempt is the third stage in the commission of crime. It is first explicit
stage for committing crime. It can be defined as a direct movement towards the
execution of a crime after the stage of intention and preparation.
According to Sir Stephen, an attempt to commit a crime is an act termed with
intention to commit it and forming part of a series of acts which could
constitute the offence, if it were not interrupted.
An attempt to crime has been covered in the IPC, in three different ways:
In some cases, punishment for completed offence and their attempt is same, has
been provided under Section 121, 124, 124(A), 125, 130, 131, 152, 153(A), 161,
162, 163, 165, 196, 198, 200, 213, 239, 240, 241, 251, 335, 337, 391, 398 and
In many cases, different punishments have been provided for the completed
offence and its attempt. Such cases are under Section 302, 304, 307, 308, 392,
393 and 309.
Rest of the cases is covered under Section 511.
It is the last stage in the commission of crime. This stage is considered to be
taken place, when an offender is successful in committing his/her intention.
Depending on the situation, if offence is completed, then person will become
guilty and if unsuccessful, he will be guilty of his attempt.
Crimes are of different types, one among them is inchoate crime. These are also
called by names such as preliminary crime, inchoate offence and incomplete
crimes. It can be defined as an act or omission taken towards committing a crime
or acts that constitute indirect participation in a crime. Earlier inchoate
crime was considered as a minor crime, but now it is considered as a serious
crime. There are actions which may not be a crime in and off itself, however
actions may act as a purpose of furthering or advancing a crime.
Types of Inchoate Crime
Inchoate crime is categorized into three types viz. abetment, criminal
conspiracy and attempt, which are discussed below:
In simple words, abet means to encourage or assist to do something wrong,
especially in the context of committing a crime. Abetment includes help,
co-activity and support within its ambit. Many times, a person does not want to
do certain criminal acts, however under the influence or abetment by another
person, that person can commit crime.
In the case of Sanju v. State of Madhya Pradesh
, the honorable Supreme
Court defined abet
as meaning to aid, to assist or to give aid, to command, to
procure, or to Counsel, to countenance, to encourage or to set another one to
Generally, a person who has committed it is liable for it, but principle of
abetment emphasizes that one who helped criminal or provided him assistance, can
also be held liable. Provisions Related to Abetment in the IPC, 1860
Following sections of the IPC are related with the abetment.
Abetment of a Thing (Section 107)
A person abets the doing of a thing, who:
- instigates any person to do that thing, or
- engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing
of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of
that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing, or
- intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that
For example: A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant, from a Courts of
Justice to apprehend Z. B knowing that facts and also that C is not, Z, wilfully
represents to A that C is Z, and thereby, intentionally causes A to apprehend C.
Here, B abets by instigation the apprehension of C.
Abettor (Section 108)
A person abets an offence, who abets either the commission of an offence, or the
commission of an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable
by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of
the abettor. To constitute the offence of abetment, it is not necessary that the
act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the
offence should be caused.
For example, A instigates B to murder C. B refuses to do so. A is guilty of
abetting B to commit murder.
It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of
committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or
knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge.
For example, A, with a guilty intention, abets a child or a lunatic to commit an
act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of
committing an offence, and having the same intention as A. Here A, whether the
act be committed or not, is guilty of abetting an offence.
Section 109 of the Act
This section deals with 'Punishment of abetment, if the act abetted is committed
in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment'. As
per the provisions of this section, whoever abets any offence shall, if the act
abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is
made by this code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the
punishment provided for the offence.
For example, A instigates B to give false evidence. B, in consequence of the
instigation, commits that offence. A is guilty of abetting that offence, and is
liable to the same punishment as B.
Section 110 of the Act
This section deals with 'Punishment of abetment, if person abetted does act with
different intention from that of abettor'. As per the provisions of this
section, whoever abets the commission of an offence shall, if the person abetted
does the act with a different intention or knowledge from that of the abettor,
be punished with the punishment provided for the offence which would have been
committed, if the act had been done with the intention or knowledge of the
abettor and with no other.
Liability of Abettor when One Act Abetted and Different Act Done (Section 111)
When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for
the act done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly
abetted it. Provided the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment,
and was committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in
pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment.
For example, A instigates B to burn Z's house. B sets fire to the house and at
the same time commits theft of property there. A, though guilty of abetting the
burning of the house, is not guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a
distinct act, and not a probable consequence of the burning.
Abettor when Liable to Cumulative Punishment for Act Abetted and for Act Done
If the act for which the abettor is liable under the last preceding section is
committed in addition to the act abetted, and constitutes a distinct offence,
the abettor is liable to punishment for each of the offences.
For example, A instigates B to resist by force a distress made by a public
servant. B, in consequence, resists that distress. In offering the resistance, B
voluntarily causes grievous hurt to the officer executing the distress. As B has
committed both the offence of resisting the distress, and the offence of
voluntarily causing grievous hurt, B is liable to punishment for both these
offences; and if A knew that B was likely voluntarily to cause grievous hurt in
resisting the distress. A will also be liable to punishment for each of the
Section 113 of the Act
This section deals with 'Liability of abettor for an effect caused by the act
abetted different from that Intended by the abettor'. As per the provisions of
this section, when an act is abetted with the intention on the part of the
abettor of causing g particular effect, and an act for which the abettor is
liable in consequence of the abetment, causes a different effect from that
intended by the abettor, the abettor is liable for the effect caused, in the
same manner and to the same extent as if he had abetted the act with the
intention of causing that effect provided, he knew that the act abetted was
likely to cause that effect.
For example, A instigates B to cause grievous hurt to Z. B, in consequence of
the instigation, causes grievous hurt to Z, Z dies in consequence. Here, if A
knew that the grievous hurt abetted was likely to cause death, A is liable to be
punished with the punishment provided for murder.
Abettor Present When Offence is Committed (Section 114)
Whenever any person who if absent would be liable to be punished as an abettor,
is present when the act or offence for which he would be punishable in
consequence of the abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have committed
such act or offence.
Section 115 of the Act
This section deals with 'Abetment of offence punishable with death or
imprisonment for life, if offence is not committed'. As per the provisions of
this section, whoever abets the commission of an offence punishable with death
or imprisonment for life, shall, if that offence be not committed in consequence
of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Code for the
punishment of such abetment, be punished with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
If act causing harm be done in consequence, and if any act for which the abettor
is liable in consequence of the abetment, and which causes hurt to any person,
is done, the abettor shall be liable to imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to fourteen years, and shall also be liable to fine.
For example, A instigates B to murder Z. The offence is not committed. If B had
murdered Z, he would have been subject to the punishment of death or
imprisonment for life. Therefore, A is liable to imprisonment for a term which
may extend to seven years and also to a fine; and if any hurt be done to Z in
consequence of the abetment, he will be liable to imprisonment for a term which
may extend to fourteen years, and to fine.
Section 116 of the Act
This section deals with Abetment of offence punishable with imprisonment, if
offence be not committed
. As per the provisions of this section, whoever abets
an offence punishable with imprisonment shall, if that offence be not committed
in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Code
for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with imprisonment of any
description provided for that offence for a term which may extend to one-fourth
part of the longest term provided for that offence; or with such fine as is
provided for that offence, or with both.
For example, A offers a bribe to B, a public servant, as a reward for showing A
some favour in the exercise of B's official functions. B refuses to accept the
bribe. A is punishable under this section.
Abetting Commission of Offence by the Public or by more than Ten Persons
Whoever abets the commission of an offence by the public generally or by any
number or class of persons exceeding ten, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or
For example, A affixes in a public place a placard instigating a sect consisting
of more than ten members to meet at a certain time and place, for the purpose of
attacking the members of an adverse sect, while engaged in a procession. A has
committed the offence defined in this section.
Concealing Design to Commit Offence Punishable with Death or Imprisonment for
Life (Section 118)
Whoever intending to facilitate or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby
facilitate the commission of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment
for life, voluntarily conceals, by any act or illegal omission, the existence of
a design to commit such offence or makes any representation which he knows to be
false respecting such design, if offence is committed, be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years,
or, if the offence is not committed, with imprisonment of either description,
for a term which may extend to three years, and in either case shall also be
liable to fine.
For example, A, knowing that dacoity is about to be committed at B, falsely
informs the Magistrate that a dacoity is about to be committed at C, a place in
an opposite direction and thereby misleads the Magistrate with intent to
facilitate the commission of the offence. The dacoity is committed at B in
pursuance of the design. A is punishable under this section.
Concealing Design to Commit Offence Punishable with Imprisonment (Section 120)
Whoever, intending to facilitate or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby
facilitate the commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment,
voluntarily conceals, by any act or illegal omission, the existence of a design
to commit such offence, or makes any representation which he knows to be false
respecting such design, shall if the offence is committed, be punished with
imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may
extend to one-fourth, and, if the offence is not committed, to one-eighth, of
the longest term of such imprisonment, or with such fine as is provided for the
offence, or with both.
A criminal conspiracy is a common inchoate crime. It can be defined as a secret
pact or agreement between two or more people to commit an unlawful act or to
accomplish a lawful end by unlawful means. According to criminal law, a person
can be convicted for planning a conspiracy even if the actual crime was never
For example, A is enemy of businessman B, A plans to kill B, A buys weapon and
start following person B to find right moment to kill him. A can be charged with
conspiracy to commit murder of B, regardless of whether the killing itself is
ever attempted or completed.
In order to punish a person for criminal conspiracy, there should be sufficient
evidence to show that two or more than two people were in agreement to commit a
Provisions related to Criminal Conspiracy in the IPC, 1860
Following sections of the IPC are related with the criminal conspiracy
Definition of Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120A)
When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done:
- an illegal act, or
- an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is
designated a criminal conspiracy.
Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount
to a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or
more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.
Punishment of Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120B)
Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with
death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or
upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this code for the
punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had
abetted such offence. [Section 120B (1)]
Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to
commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with
both. [Section 120B (2)]
The Supreme Court, in Koppula Venkat Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh
"The word 'attempt' is not itself defined, and must, therefore, be taken in
its ordinary meaning. An attempt to commit an offence is an act, or a series of
acts, which leads inevitably to the commission of the offence, unless something,
which the doer of the act neither foresaw nor intended, happens to prevent this.
An attempt may be described to be an act done in part-execution of a criminal
design, amounting to more than mere preparation, but failing short of actual
consummation, and possessing, except for failure to consummate, all the elements
of the substantive crime".
There are some tests upheld by courts of India for distinguishing attempt to
commit an offence from the stage of preparations. A few of them are the
Proximity Rule, Doctrine of Locus Poenitentiae and the Equivocally Test.
Provisions related to Attempt in the IPC, 1860
Following sections of the IPC are related with the attempt
Section 511 of the Act
This section deals with 'Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable
with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment'.
As per the provisions of this section, whoever attempts to commit an offence
punishable by this Code with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, or to cause
such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the
commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this
Code for the punishment of such attempt, be punished with imprisonment of any
description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of
the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term
of imprisonment provided for that offence, or with such fine as is provided for
the offence, or with both.
Section 121 of the Act
This section deals with "Waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging
of war, against the government of India".
As per the provisions of this section, whoever wages wa; against the (Government
of India), or attempts to wage such war, or abets the waging of such war, shall
be punisheq with death, or imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to
Waging War Against any Asiatic Power in Alliance with the Government of India
Whoever wages war against the Government of any Asiatic Power in alliance or at
peace with the Government of India or attempts to wage such war, or abets the
waging of such war, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine
may be added, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.
Abetting Mutiny, or Attempting to Seduce a Soldier, Sailor or Airman from his
Duty (Section 131)
Whoever abets the committing of mutiny by an officer, soldier, sailor or airman
in the Army, Navy or Air Force of the Government of India or attempts to seduce
any such officer, soldier, sailor or airman from his allegiance or his duty,
shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to
Attempt to Murder (Section 307)
Whoever does any act with such intention of knowledge, and under such
circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of
murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is
caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to
imprisonment for life or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
Attempt to Commit Culpable Homicide (Section 308)
Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge and under such
circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of
culpable homicide not amounting to murder, shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine,
or with both; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, or with fine, or with both.
Attempt to Commit Robbery (Section 393)
Whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment
for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.