Question

Principles:

• A person is said to abet the doing of a thing when he instigates any other person to do that thing.

• Mere acquiescence, however, does not amount to instigation.

Facts: 'A' says to 'B': I am going to kill 'C'." And, 'B' replies: "Do as you wish and take the consequences"; whereafter 'A' kills 'C'.

पर्याय

• 'B' is jointly liable with 'A' for killing 'C'.

• 'B' has not abetted 'A' to kill 'C'.

• 'B' has abetted 'A' by conspiracy.

• 'B' abetted 'A' to kill 'C'.

Answer 1

'B' abetted 'A' to kill 'C'.

Explanation:

Section 108 of IPC, A person abets an offence, who abets either. The commission of an act which would be an offence or the commission of an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor.  The abetment of the illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor may not himself be bound is do that act.   
To constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed or that the effect requisite is constituted the offence should be caused. The reasonable conclusion is drawn B abetted A to kill C. "‘B’ abetted ‘A’ to kill ‘C'" is correct.