AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 2430 ::2007 AIR SCW 4313 ::2007 (3) AIR Jhar R 940 ::2007 ChandLR(Civ&Cri) 84 ::(2007) 3 AllCriR 2828 ::(2007) 4 CurCriR 37 ::2007 (3) SCC(Cri) 578 ::2007 (3) RecCriR 377 ::(2007) 8 Scale 581 ::2007 (9) SCC 791 ::(2007) 3 ChandCriC 82 ::(2007) 4 EastCriC 166 ::2007 (38) OCR 36 ::2007 (3) Crimes 100 ::2007 (5) Supreme 222 ::(2007) 56 AllIndCas 225 (SC) ::2007 (56) AllIndCas 225

Supreme Court Of India

(From : 2001 (1) Chand Cri C 414 (Punj and Har))

Hon'ble Judge(s): Arijit Pasayat, B. P. Singh , JJ

(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.149, S.141— Unlawful assembly - No proof of common object - Conviction with help of S. 149 - Not permissible. Section 149 has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its operation. The emphasis is on the common object and not on common intention. Mere presence in an unlawful assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a common object and he was actuated by that common object and that object is one of those set out in S. 141. Where common object of an unlawful assembly is not proved, the accused persons cannot be convicted with the help of S. 149. The crucial question to determine is whether the assembly consisted of five or more persons and whether the said persons entertained one or more of the common objects, as specified in S. 141. It cannot be laid down as a general proposition of law that unless an overt act is proved against a person, who is alleged to be a member of unlawful assembly, it cannot be said that he is a member of an assembly. The only thing required is that he should have understood that the assembly was unlawful and was likely to commit any of the acts which fall within the purview of S. 141. The word 'object' means the purpose or design and, in order to make it 'common', it must be shared by all.(Para 8) ....