AIR 1975 SUPREME COURT 175 ::(1975) 3 SCC 495 ::1975 SCC(Cri) 87 ::1976 MadLJ(Cri) 78 ::1976 (1) SCJ 15 ::1975 2 SCR 622

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Allahabad)

Hon'ble Judge(s): Y. V. Chandrachud, P. N. Bhagwati , JJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.136— Finding of fact by lower Courts -Supreme Court would not take a different view of the facts. (Para 5) (B) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.107 Expln.2— Intentional aiding and active complicity necessary. Decision of Allahabad High Court, D/- 12-4-1973, Reversed. In order to constitute abatement, the abetter must be shown to have "intentionally" aided to commission of the crime. Mere proof that the crime charged could not have been committed without the @page-SC176 interposition of the alleged abettor is not enough compliance with the requirements of Section 107. A person may, for example invite another casually or for a friendly purpose and that may facilitate the murder of the invitee. But unless the invitation was extended with intent to facilitate the commission of the murder, the person inviting cannot be said to have abetted the murder. It is not enough that an act on the part of the alleged abettor happens to facilitate the commission of the crime. Intentional aiding and therefore active complicity is the gist of the offence of abatement under the third paragraph of Section 107.(Para 6) (C) C....