Section 51 in THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 – BNS

Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done

51. When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act
    done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly abetted it:
    Provided that the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment, and was
    committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the
    conspiracy which constituted the abetment.
    Illustrations.
    (a) A instigates a child to put poison into the food of Z, and gives him poison for that
    purpose. The child, in consequence of the instigation, by mistake puts the poison into the
    food of Y, which is by the side of that of Z. Here, if the child was acting under the influence
    of A’s instigation, and the act done was under the circumstances a probable consequence of
    the abetment, A is liable in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had instigated the
    child to put the poison into the food of Y.
    (b) A instigates B to burn Z’s house, B sets fire to the house and at the same time
    commits theft of property there. A, though guilty of abetting the burning of the house, is not
    guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a distinct act, and not a probable consequence
    of the burning.
    (c) A instigates B and C to break into an inhabited house at midnight for the purpose of
    robbery, and provides them with arms for that purpose. B and C break into the house, and
    being resisted by Z, one of the inmates, murder Z. Here, if that murder was the probable
    consequence of the abetment, A is liable to the punishment provided for murder.