Jasdeep Singh @ Jassu vs. The State of Punjab
Background
Following a late-night altercation in Jalandhar in April 2011 arising from a suspected raid at a hotel, four accused were convicted for the death of the complainant's son: one (A1) actually fired the fatal shot, another (A2) brandished a gun, while the appellants (A3 and A4) allegedly exhorted A1 with the words "what are you seeing now" just before the shooting. The trial court and High Court convicted all four for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part I IPC) with life sentences, holding there was no premeditation and applying Section 34 IPC (common intention) to fasten equal liability on A3 and A4 for merely making that verbal exhortation. A3 and A4 appealed their conviction, while the victim's father separately appealed seeking enhancement to murder (Section 302 IPC).
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court undertook a detailed review of Section 34 IPC's history and case law, holding that shared liability requires proof of a common intention plus actual participation in furtherance of it: mere presence or an ambiguous statement is not enough. It found the key witness on premeditation (PW13) had rightly been disbelieved by both lower courts as unreliable, and the sole evidence used to implicate A3 and A4, the alleged exhortation to A1, was itself an improvement introduced later by the complainant (PW6) that should equally have been disbelieved, especially since A2, not A1, already held a gun before that statement was made, making the sequence illogical. Since no other evidence connected A3 and A4 to a common intention with the actual shooter, the Court set aside their convictions and allowed their appeals, while dismissing the complainant's appeal for enhancement to murder as the findings on absence of premeditation by the lower courts were not perverse.
Lesson Learnt
Constructive/vicarious criminal liability under Section 34 IPC cannot rest on a vague or uncorroborated statement of exhortation alone; courts must independently verify both a genuine common intention and actual participation before extending an offender's guilt to bystanders or companions.