Home > Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 > Section 51

Section 51 BNS: Liability of Abettor When One Act Is Abetted and a Different Act Is Done

Section 51 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with the liability of an abettor when the person abetted does an act different from the act originally abetted. Liability extends to the different act only when the statutory conditions, including the probable consequence requirement, are satisfied.

Act No. 45 of 2023 Chapter IV: Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy and Attempt In force from 1 July 2024

Text of Section 51 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

51. Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done. When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly abetted it:

Provided that the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment, and was committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment.

Illustrations Under Section 51 BNS

Illustration (a). A instigates a child to put poison into the food of Z, and gives him poison for that purpose. The child, in consequence of the instigation, by mistake puts the poison into the food of Y, which is by the side of that of Z. Here, if the child was acting under the influence of A's instigation, and the act done was under the circumstances a probable consequence of the abetment, A is liable in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had instigated the child to put the poison into the food of Y.

Illustration (b). A instigates B to burn Z's house, B sets fire to the house and at the same time commits theft of property there. A, though guilty of abetting the burning of the house, is not guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a distinct act, and not a probable consequence of the burning.

Illustration (c). A instigates B and C to break into an inhabited house at midnight for the purpose of robbery, and provides them with arms for that purpose. B and C break into the house, and being resisted by Z, one of the inmates, murder Z. Here, if that murder was the probable consequence of the abetment, A is liable to the punishment provided for murder.

Meaning of Section 51 BNS

Section 51 addresses a departure between the act that was abetted and the act that was actually done. The abettor does not become liable for every additional or different act committed by the person abetted. The different act must satisfy the conditions stated in the proviso.

If those conditions are established, the law treats the abettor as liable for the different act in the same manner and to the same extent as if that different act had itself been directly abetted.

Essential Conditions for Liability Under Section 51

What Is the "Probable Consequence" Test?

The probable consequence requirement limits the reach of Section 51. A merely coincidental, independent or distinct offence committed by the person abetted does not automatically become the responsibility of the abettor.

The statutory illustrations demonstrate this distinction. Theft committed while carrying out an instigated house burning is treated as a distinct act and not a probable consequence of the burning. By contrast, murder committed when armed persons break into an inhabited house at midnight for robbery may attract the abettor's liability if the murder was a probable consequence of that abetment.

Section 51 and Section 50 BNS

Section 50 BNS deals with a difference in the intention or knowledge of the person abetted and the abettor. Section 51 deals instead with a different act being done from the act originally abetted.

Section 51 and Cumulative Punishment Under Section 52

Section 52 BNS deals with cumulative punishment where the act for which the abettor becomes liable under Section 51 is committed in addition to the act abetted and constitutes a distinct offence. In such a case, the statutory conditions may result in liability for punishment for each offence.

Different Effect Under Section 53 BNS

Section 53 BNS addresses a related but different situation: an act for which the abettor is liable causes an effect different from the effect intended by the abettor. Section 53 applies subject to its requirement concerning the abettor's knowledge that the act abetted was likely to cause that effect.

Practical note: Liability under Section 51 turns on the facts connecting the different act with the original abetment. The nature of the instigation, aid or conspiracy, the circumstances in which the different act occurred, and whether that act was a probable consequence are central to applying the provision.

Official References

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Section 51 BNS provide?

Section 51 provides for an abettor's liability when one act is abetted but a different act is done, provided the different act satisfies the statutory probable consequence and connection requirements.

Is an abettor liable for every different act committed by the person abetted?

No. The different act must be a probable consequence of the abetment and must have been committed under the influence of the instigation, with the aid, or in pursuance of the conspiracy constituting the abetment.

What happens if the different act is independent of the abetment?

The statutory illustration involving theft during the burning of a house shows that a distinct act that is not a probable consequence of the abetted act does not, merely for that reason, make the abettor liable for the distinct offence.

When did Section 51 BNS come into force?

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024, except for the separately excluded provision in Section 106(2).