IPC 107. Abetment of a thing —

A person abets the doing of a thing, who—

First — Instigates any person to do that thing; or

Secondly — Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or

Thirdly — Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Explanation 1 — A person who by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.


A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C.

 Explanation 2 — Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.

2019 SCeJ 118


18 January, 2019

Penal Code, 1860, Section 107 – Instigation. Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009) 16 SCC 605: (2010) 3 SCC (Crl.) 367),  Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh [(2001) 9 SCC 618 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 1088] , Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal (2012) 9 SCC 734, referred.

Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. To satisfy the requirement of “instigation”, though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes “instigation” must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Where the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, in which case, an “instigation” may have to be inferred. A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.  Thus, to constitute “instigation”, a person who instigates another has to provoke, incite, urge or encourage the doing of an act by the other by “goading” or “urging forward”. The dictionary meaning of the word “goad” is “a thing that stimulates someone into action; provoke to action or reaction” (see Concise Oxford English Dictionary); “to keep irritating or annoying somebody until he reacts” (see Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 7th Edn.). 

Instigation - Words uttered in a fit of anger or omission without any intention cannot be termed as instigation. 



Rs. 1000/- per annum /  updates on your mobile – Full TEXT


Call 9463598502 or

Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.