when Imposition of vicarious liability with aid of S. 34 is permissible and what are the requirements of the same. Significance of amendment made to S. 34 in 1870 adding the phrase “in furtherance of the common intention” is to be construed as an advancement or promotion. Necessity of proving that accused on whom vicarious liability is sought to be imposed shared common intention and since direct evidence is rarely available , it can be inferred from the acts or conduct of the accused and other relevant circumstances. Case law surveyed in detail and principles summarized regarding how common intention is to be inferred and determined in each case.

[Jasdeep Singh v. State of Punjab, (2022) 2 SCC 545]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Do not copy the content of this website.

Terms And condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.