IPC Section 113 and BNS Section 53: Liability of Abettor for a Different Effect
When a person abets an act intending one result, but the act causes another, criminal liability may extend to the actual result if the abettor knew that result was likely.
Meaning and scope of Section 113 IPC
Section 113 IPC addressed the liability of an abettor for an effect caused by the act abetted different from that intended by the abettor. It applied where the abettor intended a particular effect, the abetted act produced a different effect, and the abettor knew that the different effect was likely.
Section 53 BNS: Current statutory provision
When an act is abetted with the intention on the part of the abettor of causing a 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.
Source: Official Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, India Code (PDF), Section 53.
Statutory illustration
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.
The illustration explains the knowledge requirement. A intended grievous hurt, but the act caused death. The statutory consequence depends on whether A knew that the abetted grievous hurt was likely to cause death. The prosecution must establish the relevant facts and the requirements of the applicable substantive offence.
Essential ingredients of liability
- Abetment: The accused instigated, intentionally aided, or participated in abetment by conspiracy as legally defined.
- Intended effect: The abettor intended a particular consequence of the act.
- Different actual effect: The act for which the abettor is liable caused an effect different from the one intended.
- Knowledge of likelihood: The abettor knew that the act abetted was likely to cause the actual effect. Mere hindsight or an unexpected result does not, by itself, establish this requirement.
- Causal connection: The different effect resulted from the act for which liability arises through the abetment.
Meaning of important legal terms
Abetment and abettor
Section 45 BNS addresses abetment of a thing through instigation, conspiracy accompanied by an act or illegal omission in pursuance of the conspiracy, or intentional aid. Section 46 BNS defines an abettor, including a person who abets the commission of an offence or an act that would be an offence if committed by a legally capable person with the same intention or knowledge.
Effect different from that intended
This means the consequence actually caused by the abetted act differs from the consequence the abettor sought to bring about. Section 53 focuses on knowledge that the actual effect was likely, rather than requiring proof that the abettor specifically desired that effect.
Distinction from related provisions
Section 51 BNS (formerly Section 111 IPC) concerns liability when a different act is done from the act abetted, subject to the statutory probable-consequence test. Section 52 BNS (formerly Section 112 IPC) addresses cumulative punishment when distinct offences are committed. Section 53 BNS instead concerns a different effect resulting from an act for which the abettor is liable.
Punishment and application
Section 53 does not prescribe a standalone fixed term of imprisonment. It extends liability to the effect caused, in the same manner and to the same extent as if the abettor had intended that effect, provided the statutory knowledge condition is proved. The applicable punishment therefore depends on the offence established under the relevant law.
Official legal references
Read the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (official Act), the NCRB BNS chapter-wise statutory text, and the BPR&D IPC-BNS correspondence table for verification of the section mapping.
Frequently asked questions
Which BNS section corresponds to IPC Section 113?
Section 53 BNS corresponds to Section 113 IPC.
Is an abettor automatically liable for every unintended result?
No. The provision requires, among other things, knowledge that the act abetted was likely to cause the different effect.
Does Section 53 BNS specify a separate punishment?
No. Liability and punishment depend on the effect caused and the substantive offence established.
This article is general legal information. The governing law depends on the date of the alleged conduct and the facts of the case.