Common intention and Common object
Introduction
The Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, provides for several offenses which determine the liability of a person when he commits an act in combination with others. In such cases, a joint liability is created against all of the offenders, since the intention or objective of the offenders was one and the same. The Pakistan Penal Code lays emphasis on the manner in which one person becomes connected to the other offenders, in order to determine liability.
Participant in the commission of a crime
Generally, a person may become a participant in the commission of a crime in the following ways:
- If he commits the crime himself
- If he commits the crime with someone else
- If he, in order to commit the crime, puts a third agency at work, which would commit the crime on his behalf
- If he helps or aids the offender once the offender commits the crime, in screening him from justice
Understanding Liability in Individual and Joint Offenses
The first point in an offense calls solely for the liability of the offender, as there is no association with anyone else. The latter two points are offenses of abetment. The second point is the basis of joint liability, which can make it difficult to determine the liability of each person involved in the act when offenders are a group of people. This is especially true when they have committed the crime through big or small acts that attract different extents of liability.
Joint Liability in the Pakistan Penal Code
Sections 34 through 38 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, address the concept of joint criminal liability, delineating the nuances of collective actions in criminal activities. Specifically, Section 34 elaborates on the shared intention among offenders. It's crucial to understand the substantial distinction between "common intention" and "common object," as their significant differences warrant separate sections within the Code. For a thorough comprehension of these differences, an isolated examination of each concept is essential before exploring how they diverge from one another.
Section 34 – Common Intention
Section 34 is enacted on the basis of joint liability arising out of a common intention of the offenders. An important feature of this section is the participation in action by the offenders.
Section 34 states that when an offense is committed by several persons in furtherance of a common intention, i.e. the intention of all of them, every such person is liable for the offense in the same way as if he had committed the offense alone. The language does not say “common intention of all”, or “an intention common to all”, but that the intention animated to the accused leading them to commit the offense in furtherance of a common intention. This section comes into play where it becomes difficult to examine the acts of individuals acting together, and exactly what part was committed by whom.
Important requirements:
- A criminal act must be done
- The criminal act must be done by more than one person
- The criminal act must be done in furtherance of a common intention of such persons
- The common intention must exist due to a pre-arranged plan between such persons
- Such persons must participate in some manner so as to constitute the offence
- The physical presence of such persons in some manner may be required in certain offences
To prove joint liability, it's important to show that all involved had a shared plan or intention to commit a crime, which can be inferred from how the situation unfolded. Although their actions might differ, if they were driven by a common goal, they're all equally liable. The concept of "common intention" varies with each case's specific details.
Section 149 – Common Object
Section 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, talks about when a group of people can be in trouble together because they were part of a plan or goal that was against the law. This rule is split into two parts:
1. If someone in a group does something bad to help achieve the group's goal, everyone in the group can be held responsible.
2. If the group does something bad that everyone knows could happen because of their goal, they all can be held responsible, too.
So, this means if you're part of a group with a plan to do something wrong, and someone does something to make that plan happen, or even if something bad happens that the group knew could happen, everyone in the group might get into trouble together.
In simple words, the application of this section depends upon two main facts:
- An offence was committed by a member of an unlawful assembly
- Such offense was committed in furtherance of a common object of that unlawful assembly, or the members of the assembly knew that such offense would likely be committed, implying knowledge.
Under Section 149
Under Section 149, being part of an unlawful group with a shared goal can lead to conviction without needing to prove individual actions. The key is proving the group (of at least five people) had a common, illegal purpose. This common goal can be formed spontaneously, and liability applies if the group's actions align with this aim. The knowledge that the assembly is unlawful and actions are in line with their common goal is crucial for conviction under this section.
Difference Between Common Intention And Common Object
When cases of joint liability arise, Sections 34 as well as 149, may be applicable. But, Section 149 has a wider application than Section 34.
- The main difference between Common intention (Section 34) and Common object (Section 149) is that the former requires another offense like murder to apply and involves prior planning among the accused, making its application limited. On the other hand, Common object pertains to the offense of unlawful assembly and can emerge at any stage without needing proof of prior agreement among members, and its applicability ends once the offense is committed.
- Under Section 34, common intention involves active, usually physical, participation. Conversely, Section 149 makes individuals liable just for being part of an unlawful assembly, provided they knew of its unlawful purpose and shared a common goal, even if they didn't actively partake in the offense. This establishes a constructive liability on the assembly's members under Section 149.
- To sum it up, an unlawful assembly needs at least 5 people with a shared goal to do something illegal. Under Section 34, the number of people isn't important; even two people can have a common intention. But for common objects, there must be five or more, all-knowing about the illegal goal and how it connects to doing something wrong.
- Common objects are specific and listed under Section 141, needing to meet these criteria for Section 149 to apply. On the other hand, common intention can be broader, covering any mindset as it's not limited to specific situations. Object is more focused and used only in certain cases due to their broader implications.
- Common intention and common object are subtly different, leading to them being in different parts of the Code. Defining them clearly is hard, so it's up to judges to clarify these concepts in their rulings.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Pakistan Penal Code, of 1860, intricately outlines the provisions for determining the liability of individuals in the commission of crimes, both individually and jointly. Key sections such as 34 and 149 delve into the concepts of "common intention" and "common object," respectively, establishing the framework for attributing liability in cases where criminal actions involve the participation of multiple individuals. These sections underscore the importance of a shared intention or objective among the offenders, which serves as a critical factor in determining their collective liability. The nuanced distinctions between common intention and common object highlight the legal system's approach to addressing the complexities of joint offenses, emphasizing the necessity of understanding the specifics of each case to accurately assign liability. Through these provisions, the Pakistan Penal Code endeavors to ensure that justice is served by meticulously scrutinizing the involvement and intentions of all parties in criminal activities, thereby affirming the principle that those who act together with a shared unlawful purpose are equally accountable under the law.