Judgments - Abetment
UDE SINGH & ORS VS STATE OF HARYANA
GIRISH SINGH VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
JAGDISHRAJ KHATTA VERSUS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
NARAYAN MALHARI THORAT VERSUS VINAYAK DEORAO BHAGAT AND ANR
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ORS Vs. STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR
Liyakatuddin Versus State of M.P
Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke Versus State of Maharashtra and Another
EKNATH S/O. VITHALRAO SHINDE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
SANJAY S/O BHIMRAO DAHAKE Vs THE STATE OF MAH.THR.PSO.CHANDRAPUR
KANPAI HAZARIKA @ HEMANTA HAZARIKA VS THE STATE OF ASSAM
Rakesh Gupta Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Yanesh @ Yogesh Kumar Sahu Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
RAVINDRA BHIMRAO KHILLARE. Vs 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
SHESHRAO WASUDEO DANGE Vs THE STATE OF MAH. THR. ITS PSO PSO AKOLA
STATE OF MAH.THR. PSO AMRAVATI Vs RAJENDRA KASHIRAO BHUJADE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs RAMESH DAMODAR MORE & ANR.
STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs SELVI J. JAYALALITHA & ORS.
GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
There is thus neither any proximate nor remote acts of omission or commission on the part of the appellant and his family members that can be irrefutably construed to be a direct or indirect cause or factor compelling Surjit and her daughters to take the extreme step of self-elimination. It is thus manifest that the offence punishable is one of abetment of the commission of suicide by any person, predicating existence of a Full Judgment
SOMASUNDARAM @ SOMU Vs. STATE REP.BY DY.COMM.OF POLICE
…For the present, it may be sufficient to state that the gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy created under Section 120-A is a bare agreement to commit an offence. It has been made punishable under Section 120-B. The offence of abetment created under the second clause of Section 107 requires that there must be something more than a Full Judgment