All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  The question is based on the reasoning and ar... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
''The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.''
The definition of 'abetment' under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.
The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by
  • instigating a person to do that thing
  • engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing
  • intentionally aiding a person to do that thing
When any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.
Abetment by Conspiracy:
'Conspiracy' basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. 'Instigation' basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.
Abetment by Aiding:
The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word 'abet' should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.
Q. Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.
  • a)
    Amit is liable for abetment
  • b)
    Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahana's adamant behaviour, yet he didn't reconcile.
  • c)
    Amit is not liable for abetment
  • d)
    Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and pri...
Amit is not liable as he had an argument with Ahana, and the act of Ahana of threatening Amit of killing herself if he doesn't reconcile with her is immature. There was no instigation or abatement from Amit's end which would force Ahana to take such step. Furthermore, a week time is sufficient to cool down, and any reasonable person would not believe that a person would do something what he/she had spoken of while in a fit of rage.
View all questions of this test
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crim e). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Mr X had committed a murder and was on a run. He went to his friends house to seek shelter. His friend did not know that he had committed a murder and gave him shelter. But after two days, Mr Xs friend was watching TV, from which he got to know that Mr X had committed a murder, but he did not do anything.After a week of knowledge, X ran away. When the police arrived, they charged Mr X for murder and his friend for abetmentas they saw X running out of the house where he had hid himself. Decide.

It is essential to the creation of a contract that both parties should agree to the same thing in the same sense. Mutual consent, which should also be a free consent, is the sine qua non of a valid agreement and one of its essential elements is that a thing is understood in the same sense by a party as is understood by the other. Not only consent, but free consent is provided in Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 to be necessary to the complete validity of a contract. Consent is free when it works without obstacles to impede its exercise. Where there is no consent or no real and certain object of consent, there can be no contract at all. Where there is consent, but not free consent, there is generally a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was not free. A general averment that consent was not freely obtained is not enough, and it is necessary to set up one of the vitiating elements such as fraud which includes, false assertion, active concealment, promise without intention of performing it, any other deceptive act, or any act declared as fraudulent. In order to constitute fraud, the act should have been done by the party to the contract, or by any other person with his connivance, or by his agent and with intent to deceive the other party thereto or his agent, or to induce him to enter into the contract. There is no duty upon parties to speak about facts likely to affect the other party’s consent to the contract and mere silence does not amount to fraud, unless the circumstances of the case show that there is duty to speak, or silence is, in itself equivalent to speech. On the other hand, misrepresentation falls into three categories: (i) a statement of fact, which if false, would be misrepresentation if the maker believes it to be true, but which is not justified by the information he possesses; (ii) any breach of duty which gains an advantage to the person committing it by misleading another to his prejudice, there being no intention to deceive; and (iii) causing a party to an agreement to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement, even though done innocently.Q.Mr. A sells a car to Mr. Y, his childhood friend with a knowledge that the car is defective. Bef ore buying the car, Mr. Y says to Mr. A , “If you do not deny it, I shall assume that the car is perfect”. Mr. A says nothing. In light of the statement, decide the liability of Mr. A.

It is essential to the creation of a contract that both parties should agree to the same thing in the same sense. Mutual consent, which should also be a free consent, is the sine qua non of a valid agreement and one of its essential elements is that a thing is understood in the same sense by a party as is understood by the other. Not only consent, but free consent is provided in Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 to be necessary to the complete validity of a contract. Consent is free when it works without obstacles to impede its exercise. Where there is no consent or no real and certain object of consent, there can be no contract at all. Where there is consent, but not free consent, there is generally a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was not free. A general averment that consent was not freely obtained is not enough, and it is necessary to set up one of the vitiating elements such as fraud which includes, false assertion, active concealment, promise without intention of performing it, any other deceptive act, or any act declared as fraudulent. In order to constitute fraud, the act should have been done by the party to the contract, or by any other person with his connivance, or by his agent and with intent to deceive the other party thereto or his agent, or to induce him to enter into the contract. There is no duty upon parties to speak about facts likely to affect the other party’s consent to the contract and mere silence does not amount to fraud, unless the circumstances of the case show that there is duty to speak, or silence is, in itself equivalent to speech. On the other hand, misrepresentation falls into three categories: (i) a statement of fact, which if false, would be misrepresentation if the maker believes it to be true, but which is not justified by the information he possesses; (ii) any breach of duty which gains an advantage to the person committing it by misleading another to his prejudice, there being no intention to deceive; and (iii) causing a party to an agreement to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement, even though done innocently.Q.In which of the following statements will a contract not be voidable at the option of a party?

Direction: Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.Legal Principles: A deceit occurs when a misrepresentation is made with the express intention of defrauding a party, subsequently causing loss to that party. “Misrepresentation” means and includes— the positive assertion, in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it, of that which is not true, though he believes it to be true; any breach of duty which, without an intent to deceive, gains an advantage of the person committing it, or any one claiming under him, by misleading another to his prejudice, or to the prejudice of any one claiming under him; causing, however innocently, a party to an agreement, to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement. Fact: XY Company in its prospectus stated that the company was permitted to make engines that were powered by electricity, rather than by fuel. In reality, the company did not possess such a right as this had to be approved by the Government Board. Gaining the approval for such a claim from the Board was considered a formality in such circumstances and the claim was put forward in the prospectus with this information in mind. However, the claim of the company for this right was later refused by the Board. The individuals who had purchased a stake in the business, upon reliance on the statement, brought a claim for deceit against the defendant’s business. Decide.

Direction: Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.Legal Principles: 1. A deceit occurs when a misrepresentation is made with the express intention of defrauding a party, subsequently causing loss to that party.2. “Misrepresentation” means and includes - the positive assertion, in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it, of that which is not true, though he believes it to be true; any breach of duty which, without an intent to deceive, gains an advantage of the person committing it, or any one claiming under him, by misleading another to his prejudice, or to the prejudice of any one claiming under him; causing, however innocently, a party to an agreement, to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement.Fact: XY Company in its prospectus stated that the company was permitted to make engines that were powered by electricity, rather than by fuel. In reality, the company did not possess such a right as this had to be approved by the Government Board. Gaining the approval for such a claim from the Board was considered a formality in such circumstances and the claim was put forward in the prospectus with this information in mind. However, the claim of the company for this right was later refused by the Board. The individuals who had purchased a stake in the business, upon reliance on the statement, brought a claim for deceit against the defendant’s business.Decide.

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC requires a person to abet the commission of an offence. This abetment may occur in any of the three methods that the provision prescribes.The Section says that abetment basically takes place when a person abets the doing of a thing by instigating a person to do that thing engaging with another person (or persons) in a conspiracy to do that thing intentionally aiding a person to do that thingWhen any of these requirements exists, the offence of abetment is complete. Sometimes a person may commit more than one of these three circumstances in a single offence.Abetment by Conspiracy:Conspiracy basically means an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Merely intending to commit an offence is not sufficient for this purpose. Thus, the conspirators must actively agree and prepare themselves to commit that offence. It becomes a conspiracy. Instigation basically means suggesting, encouraging or inciting a person to do or abstain from doing something. Instigation may take place either directly or indirectly, by written or oral words, or even by gestures and hints. The instigation must be sufficient to actively encourage a person to commit an offence. It should not be mere advice or a simple suggestion. The instigator need not even possess mens rea (a guilty intention to commit the crime). Furthermore, the act which the conspirators conspire to commit itself must be illegal or punishable. For example, in dowry death cases, the in-laws of the victim are often guilty of abetment by conspiracy. They may do so by constantly taunting, torturing or instigating the victim. Even suicides may take place in this manner through abetment by conspiracy.Abetment by Aiding:The third manner in which abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence. This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The intention to aid the offender is very important. Explanation of this Section throws some lights on what instigation may mean in this context. It says that instigation may generally happen even by wilful misrepresentation; or by willful concealment of a material fact which a person is bound to disclose. The concept of abetment widens the horizons of criminal law to incorporate these criminal intentions and penalise them even when the person who bought the knife did not actually kill anyone but handed it over to someone else to do it. To explain the concept of abetment, the word abet should be given a deep scrutiny. In general use, it means to aid, advance, assist, help and promote.Q.Amit and Ahana have a heated argument post their breakup. Ahana, in a fit of rage, tells Amit that if he does not reconcile with her within a week, then she will end her life by consuming poison. Amit is aware of the adamant behaviour of Ahana, yet he does not reconcile with Ahana. After a week, Ahana consumes poison and dies. Decide whether Amit can be held liable for abetment.a)Amit is liable for abetmentb)Amit is liable for abatement as he knew about Ahanas adamant behaviour, yet he didnt reconcile.c)Amit is not liable for abetmentd)Amit is liable because his action has caused the death of a person.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup