Skip to content


The Empress Vs. Troyluckho Nath Chowdhry and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1879)ILR4Cal366
AppellantThe Empress
RespondentTroyluckho Nath Chowdhry and ors.
Excerpt:
abetment of abetment - property removed with criminal intent, but with consent of owner--penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 108, expls. 2, 4; section 378, expl. 5. - .....the circumstance--that owing to the property being removed with the knowledge of the owner, the technical offence of theft had not been committed--does not save the prisoner from the consequence of the abetment which he has been guilty of and therefore he has been properly convicted.2. the prisoner will be brought up before the magistrate for sentence.white, j.3. i agree in thinking that, upon the facts found by the magistrate, the prisoner may be properly convicted of the offence of abetting an offence.
Judgment:

Jackson, J.

1. It appears to me that, under expl. 4 of the 108th section of the Indian Penal Code, the abetment of an abetment being an offence, and the prisoner having instigated Cummins to do that which, if committed, would have been an offence, he has himself thereby committed an offence, and inasmuch as by expl. 2, to constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, therefore the circumstance--that owing to the property being removed with the knowledge of the owner, the technical offence of theft had not been committed--does not save the prisoner from the consequence of the abetment which he has been guilty of and therefore he has been properly convicted.

2. The prisoner will be brought up before the Magistrate for sentence.

White, J.

3. I agree in thinking that, upon the facts found by the Magistrate, the prisoner may be properly convicted of the offence of abetting an offence.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //