Attempt, Conspiracy, And Incitement
1. Attempt
Legal Definition:
An attempt to commit an offense occurs when a person, with intent to commit a crime, does some act towards its commission but fails or is prevented from completing the offense. It is punishable even if the actual crime is not completed.
Relevant Section:
Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines and punishes attempt to commit offenses.
Case Laws:
State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George, AIR 1965 SC 722
Facts: The accused fired at the deceased intending to kill him but missed.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that an attempt to commit murder was made, even though the victim was not hit. The intention coupled with the overt act was sufficient.
Significance: The act must be proximate to the commission of the offense and show clear intention.
R. v. Eagleton (1855) 3 F & F 726
Although a British case, frequently cited in Indian law, it held that mere preparation is not an attempt. There must be a direct act towards the commission of the offense.
Ratanlal & Dhirajlal on IPC
Commentary on attempt clarifies that the act should be more than preparation but less than completion, demonstrating unequivocal intention.
2. Conspiracy
Legal Definition:
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means.
Relevant Section:
Section 120A and 120B of the IPC deals with criminal conspiracy and punishment thereof.
Case Laws:
State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram, (2006) 12 SCC 254
Facts: Accused were convicted for conspiracy to commit murder.
Judgment: Supreme Court held that there must be an agreement to do an unlawful act. Even if the act is not committed, conspiracy is punishable.
Significance: The Court emphasized the necessity to prove the existence of a meeting of minds for conspiracy.
K.K. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1955 SC 549
Defined conspiracy as a common intention to commit an unlawful act, which can be inferred from conduct and circumstances.
Chandrika v. State of Kerala, (2012) 5 SCC 631
Held that mere association with accused is not conspiracy unless an agreement can be proved.
3. Incitement
Legal Definition:
Incitement means encouraging, provoking, or urging someone to commit an offense.
Relevant Section:
Incitement to commit an offense is punishable under various IPC sections depending on the offense (e.g., Section 153A for promoting enmity, Section 506 for criminal intimidation).
Case Laws:
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 955
Facts: Accused incited people to commit acts leading to communal tension.
Judgment: The Court held that mere words amounting to incitement can be punished if they create public disorder or violence.
Significance: Distinguishes between free speech and punishable incitement.
Ramesh Prasad v. Union of India, (2016) 8 SCC 1
The Supreme Court discussed incitement in the context of hate speech and observed the fine balance between freedom of expression and public order.
State of Maharashtra v. Praful B. Desai, AIR 2003 SC 2222
The Court held that incitement requires direct and intentional encouragement to commit a crime.
Comparative Summary:
| Concept | Key Elements | Punishment Basis | Notable Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attempt | Overt act toward crime with intent; failure to complete offense | Section 511 IPC | State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George |
| Conspiracy | Agreement to commit illegal act or legal act by illegal means | Sections 120A, 120B IPC | State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram |
| Incitement | Encouragement or urging to commit offense | Varies by offense (e.g., Sections 153A, 506) | Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar |
Additional Important Cases:
Bhagwan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1954 SC 549: Attempt requires overt acts, not mere preparation.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597: Clarified the procedural safeguards in criminal law including conspiracy.
Union of India v. Nalini, (1999) 5 SCC 253: Discussed conspiracy and the evidence required to establish it.
R. v. Johnson (1834) 6 C & P 261: Established principles of incitement — words or acts must incite imminent crime.
Conclusion:
Attempt focuses on taking direct steps towards committing a crime, punishable even if the crime is not completed.
Conspiracy requires an agreement between parties to commit a crime, punishable on the basis of the agreement itself.
Incitement involves provoking or urging others to commit offenses and is punishable if it leads to criminal acts or public disorder.
Each of these concepts plays a crucial role in criminal liability beyond the actual commission of a crime.
RELATED Blog
0 comments