BACK TO SECTIONS
IPC 1860REPEALED

Section 35-39

Joint Liability: When Criminal Act done with Criminal Knowledge/Intention; Co-operation by doing one of several acts; Causing effects partly by act partly by omission

Replaced by: BNS 3

VariesCognizable: VariesVaries
THE STATUTE

Original Text

Section 35: Whenever an act, which is criminal only by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge or intention, is done by several persons, each of such persons who joins in the act with such knowledge or intention is liable for the act in the same manner as if the act were done by him alone with that knowledge or intention. Section 37: When an offence is committed by means of several acts, whoever intentionally co-operates in the commission of that offence by doing any one of those acts, either singly or jointly with any other person, commits that offence. Section 38: Where several persons are engaged or concerned in the commission of a criminal act, they may be guilty of different offences by means of that act.

Simplified

Sections 35–39 build out the joint liability framework beyond Section 34 (common intention). Section 35 addresses situations where the offence is criminal only because of mental state — multiple persons can be equally liable for an act that requires criminal knowledge if each person individually possessed that knowledge. Section 37 (co-operation by distinct acts) captures distributed criminal enterprises: in a gang's operations, the person who drives, the person who plans, and the person who executes are all equally liable for the completed offence if each intentionally co-operated by performing their specific part. Section 38 recognises that co-accused can be guilty of different offences arising from the same criminal act — A and B attack C together; A intended murder (Section 302), B intended only grievous hurt (Section 325). Each is liable for their own mental state despite committing the same physical act together.

Legal Evolution

Section 37 is the foundation of organised crime liability — it allows prosecution of each member of a criminal organisation for the completed offence even when each person performed only a partial role. This principle is essential for terror financing, organised fraud, and drug trafficking prosecutions.

Landmark Precedents

Shankarlal Kacharabhai v. State of Gujarat (1965)

AIR 1965 SC 1260
RELEVANCE

Applied Section 37 in gang robbery — each participant who intentionally co-operated by performing their specific role is equally liable for the completed offence.

Practical Scenarios

"Three persons attack a victim: A intends to kill (charged under 302), B intends grievous hurt (charged under 325), C only intended simple hurt (charged under 323) — Section 38 allows different convictions from the same attack."
"A fraud ring where the forger, the impersonator, and the withdrawer each perform distinct acts but jointly commit the same fraud — Section 37 makes each liable for the complete offence."

Common Queries

Section 34 requires a common intention shared by all — each person is liable for the SAME offence. Section 38 recognises that co-accused can have DIFFERENT intentions and thus be guilty of DIFFERENT offences from the same shared criminal act.