Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter V: Of Abetment
Section 108: Abettor
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
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.
Explanation 1.—The abetment of the illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor may not himself be bound to do that act.
Explanation 2.—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.
Illustrations
Explanation 3.—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.
Illustrations
Explanation 4.—The abetment of an offence being an offence, the abetment of such an abetment is also an offence.
Illustration
Explanation 5.—It is not necessary to the commission of the offence of abetment by conspiracy that the abettor should concert the offence with the person who commits it. It is sufficient if he engages in the conspiracy in pursuance of which the offence is committed.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 108
-
P. Shanthi Pugazhenthi v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police Spe/Cbi/Acb/Chennai
Whether the appellant was rightly convicted for abetment of offence u/s.13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
-
Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of
The two appeals are filed by the appellant-former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi seeking bail in the prosec utions arising from a case registered by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Penal…
- Somasundaram @ Somu v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Commissioner of Police
- CBI Gujarat v. Dilip Mulani & Anr.