All India Bar Examination (AIBE) 3-III Previous Year Question Papers with Answers

Practice Mode:
33.

Four men agree to rob a bank. Two of them are carrying large knives and one has shotgun. The last one is carrying a bag for the money. They agreed that they will try not to hurt anyone. They enter the bank wearing masks. Threaten the staff, and demand cash. One of the bank employees tries to grab the shotgun, and the man holding it discharges the shotgun, causing the death of the employee. The men get the cash and leave the bank. Can any or all of the robbers be charged in relation to the death of the bank employee?


Principle :

When a criminal act is done by several persons furtherance of the in common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.

A: Yes, all of the robbers can be charged because the act of one an in discharging the gun was in pursuit of the common intention to hurt anyone if necessary while robbing the bank.
B: No, the robbers were of the common intention that they would try not to hurt anyone, and this was obviously an accident.
C: Yes, but only the three robbers carrying weapons may be charged as they clearly had the common intention to use the weapons, if necessary.
D: Yes, all of the robbers can be charged because the act of one man in discharging the gun was in pursuit of the common intention of all of them to rob the bank.
E: Yes, but only the man who discharged the shotgun can be charged, as it is his fault alone, and the others were of the common intention that they would try not to hurt anyone.

The answer is: D

<< Previous Question
Next Question >>

Explanation

The correct option is D: Yes, all of the robbers can be charged because the act of one man in discharging the gun was in pursuit of the common intention of all of them to rob the bank.

This is because, according to Section 34 of IPC, 1860, when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone. The common intention implies a pre-arranged plan and an active participation in the commission of the crime.

In this case, the four men had a common intention to rob the bank, and they acted in concert to execute their plan. The fact that they agreed to try not to hurt anyone does not negate their common intention, as it was only a contingent possibility and not a part of their plan. The act of discharging the gun was done in furtherance of their common intention to rob the bank, and it resulted in the death of the bank employee. Therefore, all of them are equally liable for the murder, irrespective of who actually fired the gun.