Ningappa and others vs The State of Karnataka. Criminal Appeal 100059/2018 decided on 19 August 2020.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/342132/1/CRLA100059-18-19-08-2020.pdf
Relevant Paragraphs: 86. Whenever prosecution invokes Section 34 of IPC, it must be established that the criminal act was done by more than one person in furtherance of common intention of all. It must, therefore, be proved that:- “(i) there was common intention on the part of several persons to commit a particular crime and ii) the crime was actually committed by them in furtherance of that common intention.”
87. The essence of liability under Section 34 IPC thus can be summarized as simultaneous conscious mind of persons participating in the criminal action to bring about a particular result by a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuant to it.
88 & 93. Judgments in Suresh v. State of U.P., (2001) 3 SCC 673 paragraphs 39, 40, 42, 44, 46, 51 relied on. Asif Khanv.StateofMaharashtra,reportedin(2019)5SCC 210 paragraphs 22 relied on. Ramesh Singh alias photti v. State of A.P., (2004) 11 SCC 305, paragraphs 12, 13, 14 relied on.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 