Correct option is D
The distinction between Sections 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was authoritatively expounded by the Supreme Court in
Nanak Chand v. State of Punjab. Section 34 deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention, while Section 149 pertains to offences committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of the common object. The Supreme Court clarified that Section 34 requires the participation of all members in a pre-arranged plan, leading to a shared intention, whereas Section 149 makes all members of an unlawful assembly culpable for the actions committed in pursuit of the common object, even if not all were directly involved in the act.
Information Booster: The primary difference between Sections 34 and 149 IPC lies in the nature of the group activity and the specific roles of participants. Section 34 involves a premeditated plan with a shared intention to commit a crime, making all those involved equally liable, even if only one member physically commits the act. In contrast, Section 149 criminalizes any offence committed by a member of an unlawful assembly (defined as a group of five or more people) in pursuit of the group's common object, holding all members liable regardless of their direct participation.
Additional Knowledge:
·
State of Maharashtra v. M.H. George (a): This case dealt with the strict liability in customs violations and does not discuss Sections 34 or 149.
·
Guru Deo Singh v. State of Punjab (b): This case concerns aspects of criminal conspiracy but not the specific distinction between Sections 34 and 149.
·
Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana (c): This case relates to the evidence required in criminal cases but does not elaborate on Sections 34 or 149 IPC.
