What is IPC Section 108?
IPC Section 108 sits in Chapter V of the Indian Penal Code, "Of Abetment," directly following Section 107, which defines the act of "abetment" itself — through instigation, engaging in a conspiracy, or intentional aiding. Section 108 then defines who counts as an "abettor" — the person who does the abetting — and crucially expands and clarifies the scope of that liability through five attached explanations and a series of illustrations.
The section captures two distinct scenarios: abetting the actual commission of an offence, and abetting the commission of an act that would be an offence if committed by a person legally capable of committing an offence, provided that act is done with the same intention or knowledge as the abettor's. This second limb matters because it means an abettor can be liable even where the person they abetted lacked criminal capacity — for example, a minor, or someone of unsound mind — so long as the abettor themselves had the necessary guilty mind.
Important Update: IPC to BNS Transition
With effect from 1 July 2024, the Indian Penal Code has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 for offences committed on or after that date. Section 108 IPC now corresponds to Section 46 of the BNS, which retains the same substance, updating the word "lunatic" to "a person of unsound mind" for modern terminology.
Legal Provision — Text of Section 108 IPC
Illustration: A instigates B to murder C. B refuses to do so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit murder, even though B never carried out the act — this illustrates Explanation 2 in action. The section carries three further explanations (3, 4, and 5) clarifying that it is not necessary for the abetted person to be capable of committing the offence, or to share the abettor's guilty intent, and that abetment by conspiracy does not require the abettor to have personally concerted with the person who actually commits the offence.
Nature & Scope of Section 108
| Nature of Provision | General definition — it does not create an offence or prescribe any punishment on its own |
|---|---|
| Purpose | Fixes the meaning of "abettor" for every other abetment provision in the Code (Sections 109–120) |
| Two Scenarios Covered | Abetting an actual offence, and abetting an act that would be an offence if done by a legally capable person |
| Completion Not Required | The offence of abetment is complete once the abetting act (instigation, conspiracy, or aid) has occurred — the underlying offence need not actually happen |
| Capacity of Person Abetted Irrelevant | The person abetted need not be legally capable of committing an offence, nor share the abettor's guilty state of mind |
| BNS 2023 Equivalent | Section 46 (same substance; "lunatic" updated to "person of unsound mind") |
Because Section 108 has no independent punishment, cognizability, or bailability of its own, these classifications are determined entirely by whichever specific abetment-punishment provision applies — for example, Section 109 (punishment where no express provision is made) or Section 116 (abetment of an offence punishable with imprisonment, where the offence is not committed).
Key Explanations Attached to Section 108
Explanation 1 — Abetting an illegal omission
Abetting someone's failure to act (an illegal omission) can amount to an offence, even where the abettor themselves had no legal duty to perform that act.
Explanation 2 — The abetted act need not occur
Abetment is complete as soon as the abetting conduct occurs; it is not necessary that the offence abetted actually be committed, or that its intended effect actually be caused.
Explanation 3 — Capacity of the person abetted is irrelevant
It is not necessary that the person abetted be legally capable of committing an offence, or that they share the same guilty intention or knowledge as the abettor, or indeed any guilty intention at all.
Explanation 4 — Abetting an abettor is itself abetment
The abetment of an offence being an offence in its own right, abetment of such abetment is also punishable, even though the original abettor may never actually commit the offence.
Explanation 5 — Conspiracy does not require direct coordination
It is not necessary, for abetment by conspiracy, that the abettor personally coordinate with the person who ultimately commits the offence — engaging in a broader conspiracy pursuant to which the offence is committed is sufficient.
Where "Abettor" Is Used in the IPC
The definition established by Section 108 is the foundation for the entire abetment framework in Chapter V of the Code, including:
- Section 109 — punishment of abetment, where no express provision is made for it elsewhere in the Code.
- Section 110 — punishment where the person abetted does the act with a different intention from that of the abettor.
- Section 116 — abetment of an offence punishable with imprisonment, where the offence is ultimately not committed.
- Section 118 — concealing a design to commit an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
- Sections 306 and 511 and numerous other specific provisions elsewhere in the Code, which criminalise abetting particular offences (such as suicide) using the framework Section 108 establishes.
Because the term recurs throughout the Code, Section 108 functions as the entry point for understanding secondary criminal liability — holding accountable not just those who directly commit an offence, but also those who instigate, conspire, or intentionally assist in bringing it about.