Q3.15 Marks'A' knows 'B' is standing behind a bush and instigates 'C' to set fire. 'C' denies. (a) Under which offence is 'A' guilty? (b) If 'C' listens to 'A' and sets fire and 'B' dies, what offences are committed by 'A' and 'C'?
Part (a) — A instigates C but C refuses
Facts:
A knows B is behind a bush. A instigates C to set fire. C refuses. No fire is set; no injury occurs.
A is guilty of Abetment by Instigation under BNS S45(a) (corresponding to IPC S107). Specifically, this falls under the category of abetment of an offence that was not committed (BNS S49/IPC S115).
A actively instigated C to commit an illegal act (arson/attempted murder). Even though C did not comply and no crime took place, A's instigation with the knowledge that B was behind the bush shows clear mens rea.
- The intended offence (murder/grievous hurt by fire) is punishable with life imprisonment or death.
- Punishment for A under BNS S49: imprisonment up to 7 years + fine.
Part (b) — C sets fire and B dies
Chain of Liability
A — Abettor (Instigator)
→ instigates →
C — Principal Offender
→ causes →
Death of B
Offences committed by A:
- Abetment of Murder under BNS S45 + BNS S101 (IPC S302): Since A instigated C knowing B was present, and the abetted offence (murder) was actually committed, A is liable as an abettor. The punishment for abetment when the offence is committed is the same as the principal offender — death or life imprisonment.
Offences committed by C:
- Murder under BNS S101 (IPC S302): C intentionally set fire knowing or intending to cause death or grievous hurt. B's death as a consequence makes C guilty of murder.
- Additionally, mischief by fire may also apply under BNS S326.
State of Maharashtra v. Somnath Thapa — Abettor's liability is co-extensive with the principal offender when the abetted act is carried out.