Site navigation

As of November 2026, sections 3(5) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 address common…

In Rambilas Singh v. State of Bihar, the Court explained that proof of a separate overt act by each accused is unnecessary under either doctrine. It nevertheless set aside…

Choose your answer

As of November 2026, sections 3(5) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 address common intention and liability for offences by an unlawful assembly. In which case did the Supreme Court discuss the predecessors of both provisions and hold that proof of a separate overt act by each accused is unnecessary?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer C

In Rambilas Singh v. State of Bihar, the Court explained that proof of a separate overt act by each accused is unnecessary under either doctrine. It nevertheless set aside the convictions because the evidence failed to link the stabbing to a common intention or common object. Rangaswami, Pandurang and Surendra Chauhan addressed liability based on common intention.

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic