Introduction

Research objective

Research methodology

Literature review

Abstract

Body

A crime may be committed by one or several persons and when more than one person or several
persons is involved in a crime they are referred to as Parties to a crime.

In criminal law the distinction between innocent and culpable parties are considered as the
starting point in a classification of parties.

Under certain circumstances, one who has caused, or has aided in causing, a socially harmful
act, or one who has interfered with the course of justice after such act may, be excused by the
law for such act.

The most common excuses recognized by the law are the mistake of fact based upon reasonable
grounds, infancy, insanity, necessity etc.

An example is the fatal act of a daughter in placing in her father's beverage a powder she
believed to be a beneficial medicine, but which was in fact a deadly poison.

On one hand, if the only person connected with a socially harmful occurrence is an innocent
party, or if there are several parties all within this group, no crime has been committed. On the
other hand, if the culpable party makes use of an innocent agent in the perpetration of his
criminal plan, it is the same, as if he had used “merely an instrument.”

Culpable parties are of 4 different kinds

a. Perpetrators

b. Abettors

c. Inciters and

d. CriminalProtectors
a. Perpetrators: A"perpetrator is one who, with mens rea, has caused socially harmful
occurrence either with his own hands, or by means of some tool or instrument or other non-
human agency, or by means of an innocent agent

b. Abettors: An"abettor" is the one who is present, either actually or constructively, and who,
with mens rea, either assists the perpetrator in the commission of the crime, stands by with
intent to render aid 4 if needed, or commands, counsels or other- wise encourages the
perpetrator to commit the crime.

c. Inciters: An "inciter" is the one who, with mens rea, counsels, commands, procures or
encourages another to commit a crime, the one not being present either actually or
constructively at the moment of perpetration. The word has been so used at times by the courts.
If deemed necessary some such phrase as "absent inciter" might be used.

d. Criminal protectors: a person with mens rea who was no way involved in preparation of
criminal plan, who with full knowledge of the facts, thereafter conceals the offender or gives
him some other assistance to save him from detection, arrest, trial or punishment.

COMMON LAW THEORY OF PARTIES TO CRIME

For the purposes of law of principals and accessories, it is considered there is one crime only
& although more than person may be held criminally responsible for its commission. Therefore,
when two or more persons have engaged in a felony four categories of guilty association is
recognized.
1. Principal in the first degree
2. Principal in the second degree
3. Accessories before the fact and
4. Accessories after the fact.
Common law divides guilty parties into principals and accessories. The actual perpetrator of
the felonious deed is called as a "principal". Other person who themselves are not main
offenders, but who assist or aid them, are known as “accessories".

1. PRINCIPAL IN THE FIRST DEGREE-

Principals in the first degree are the persons those who perpetrate a crime directly. In other
words, those who actually commit the crime or offence with their own hands or through
innocent agent are principals in first degree.
This can be in case the respondent used a person to make him do the act (offence) and the
person did not have the ability or capacity to commit the offence. In such situation, the
“instigator would be the principal offender and the perpetrator would be the innocent agent.”
Therefore, this can be seen that the presence of the principals in the first degree at the place
where an offence has taken place is not essential. Innocent agent is a person who by reason of
either immaturity of understanding or of impairment of mind is legally incompetent to commit
a crime. The person committing the actus reus could be completely innocent because they do
not have the capacity to commit the offence. Examples of innocent agents can be a child below
the age of discretion or a person of unsound mind who had been used to commit a crime and
they may not have the necessary mens rea.
In the case of R v Stringer and Banks,” employees were asked by their employer to send out
letters and participate in financial transactions which they did not realize would lead to
fraudulent transactions. The employer was the principal offender and the employees were
innocent agents.”

2. PRINCIPAL IN THE SECOND DEGREE

Principals in the second degree are those who are present at the commission of the crime and
extend aid and assistance for its commission. Accessories at the fact and principals in the
second degree are the two classifications which essentially denote the same type of offenders.
Accessory at the fact are generally classified as principals of the second degree, that is as an
aiders and abettors of the principal offender in the in the commission of the offence. Also
principal of second degree are the person who may be actually or constructively present in the
scene of occurrence. Such persons do not actually participate in commission of the crime.
However, they remain present, actually or constructively, at the occurrence of the crime and
thereby aid, assist, encourage or abet commission of the crime.

Difference between Principal of first degree and Principal of second degree-

Common law distinction between principals in the first degree and those in the second degree
is one of fact rather than of legal consequence. Their guilt is exactly the same unless in a
particular case some factor of mitigation applies to one and not the other, and in such case
principal may be guilty of a higher grade of the crime than the other. Principal in the first degree
is the immediate perpetrator of the crime while a principal in the second degree is one who did
not commit the crime with his own hands but was present aiding and abetting the principal.
3. ACCESSORY BEFORE THE FACT
An accessory before the fact is the person who is guilty of felony for acts which aid, counsel,
command or encourages the culpable act, without being present either actually or
constructively at the time of perpetration.11 In other words, accessories before the fact are
those who though not present in the scene of occurrence or where the crime is committed,
counsel, procure or command another to commit the crime.
The accessory before the fact is unable to render aid at the actual moment of perpetration,
because anyone in such a position is held to be constructively present and therefore known as
a principal. But he may render aid in advance, as by procuring for the perpetrator the weapon
or other means by which the felony is to be committed.
The element of time requires special mention here, but this is only to emphasize the want of
any legally established time limit within which the accessory's incitement may be recognized.
It is no ground of immunity to him, for example, that his counsel and advice were given more
than a year prior to the perpetration of the crime.

4. ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

The accessory after the fact is one who, with knowledge of the other's guilt, renders assistance
to an offender in the effort to hinder his detection, arrest, trial or punishment. In other words,
all those who knowing that a person has committed an offence knowingly receive, relieve,
comfort, harbour or assist him from escaping from the clutches of law is identified as
Accessories after the fact.
Throwing suspicion away from the principal, concealing the evidence by hiding corpse in a
homicide case, performing surgical operation upon a fugitive by altering his facial expression
and obliterating his finger prints and to enable him to evade arrest are some of the examples
for a person to be guilty as an accessory after the fact.
A person who is an accessory before the fact may also become an accessory to the same offense
after the fact but this is not same in the case of principal offender. Moreover, absence at the
time of perpetration is not necessary in the case of an accessory after the fact. For instance, a
person who was present at the time a murder was committed and he assisted in concealing the
evidence of the crime, to protect the principal from prosecution, without abetting the offender
in any way, would be held guilty as an accessory after the fact. Also under the common law, a
wife cannot be accessory after the fact by reason of having concealed her husband or given him
other assistance, knowing him to be a felon, but this does not apply to the husband who renders
such assistance to his wife, nor to others such as parents or children.
PARTIES TO CRIME IN INDIAN PENAL CODE
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) does not expressly recognize such classification of parties to
crime which is present in common law. However, it also seems that the classification of parties
and the complicity of parties were there in the mind of the authors of IPC.16Accessories at the
fact and principals in the second degree are thus two classifications which essentially denote
the same type of offenders. Both the two classifications have been classed as abettors.
However, a distinction is made with regard to the punishment that is liable to be inflicted on
them depending upon the nature of participation.
For instance, Section 114 of IPC, 1860 says that-“Whenever any person, who is absent would
be liable to be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence for which he would be
punishable in consequence of the abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have committed
such act or offence.”
The India Penal Code makes separate provisions to cover the liability of persons who associate
with or extend help, gave assistance or aid to the principal offender to flee from justice, despite
knowing well that the person has committed a crime. Also, under IPC, accessories after the fact
are known as ‘harbourers’. Section 52-A provides the definition of the term ‘habour’ which
includes food, drink, cloths, money, shelter, arms, ammunition or means of conveyance, or
assisting of a person by any means, to evade apprehension.
Examples of some of those separate provisions which talks about paties to crime in IPC are
sections 136, 157, 212, 216, 216A. These sections deal with harbouring deserter and their
liability in different methods of commission. Other examples of such provisions are section
201 which talks about “causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false
information to screen offender”20, section 412 which deals with “dishonestly receiving
property stolen in the commission of a dacoity”.

Conclusion