Section 51 BNS: Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 51 BNS at a Glance

Section 51 BNS deals with liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done. It is triable by the Court by which offence abetted is triable; it replaced Section 111 IPC on 1 July 2024.

Punishment

The punishment provided for the act done, as if the abettor had directly abetted it.

Bail depends on the underlying offence ⓘCognizance depends on the case ⓘCompoundable (depends on the case) ⓘ🏛️ Court by which offence abetted is triable ⓘ
IPC Equivalent

Section 111 →

Section 51 BNS Bare Act Text

51. Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done

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.

Source: Section 51, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 51 BNS in Simple Words

Section 51 BNS deals with a common problem in criminal law. A person may be asked to help or encourage one act, but the actual act done is different from what was planned. In such a case, the law can still hold the person liable if the act done is a probable result of the abetment and was committed in the course of carrying out the plan.

This section applies to an abettor, not the main offender alone. It becomes relevant where the final act is different in form, but still connected to the original instigation, conspiracy, or aid. The practical point is simple: a person cannot escape responsibility just because the exact manner of commission changed, if the new act was a likely outcome of the original encouragement.

For example, if someone is helped to commit one offence and ends up committing another closely connected offence, the abettor may still face liability. Courts look at intention, the link between the planned act and the act done, and whether the later act was a probable consequence of the original abetment.

Ingredients of Section 51 BNS

  • Abetment of an initial act by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid
  • Commission of a different act by the person abetted
  • The different act was a probable consequence of the abetment under the circumstances
  • The act was committed under the influence of the instigation or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy

Punishment Under Section 51 BNS

Imprisonment

The punishment provided for the act done, as if the abettor had directly abetted it.

Fine

The fine provided for the act done, where it carries one.

Bail depends on the underlying offence ⓘCognizance depends on the case ⓘCompoundable (depends on the case) ⓘ🏛️ Court by which offence abetted is triable ⓘ

The First Schedule and Section 320(3) CrPC classify this abetment by reference to the offence abetted, so cognizance, bail, the trial court and compounding all follow that offence.

  • Cognizable: According as offence abetted is cognizable or non-cognizable
  • Bailable: According as offence abetted is bailable or non-bailable
  • Compoundable: Where the offence abetted is compoundable, Section 320(3) CrPC lets its abetment be compounded in like manner. Otherwise it cannot be compounded.

The abettor answers for the act done as though he had abetted it directly, provided the act was a probable consequence of the abetment. Cognizance, bail, the trial court and compounding are those of the offence abetted.

Example of Section 51 BNS

In a housing colony outside Coimbatore, Imran gives a fifteen-year-old boy, Arun, a bottle of pesticide and tells him to pour it into the tea of Sunita. In the kitchen the two cups stand side by side, and Arun mistakes them and pours it into the tea of the sister of Sunita, who drinks it and falls seriously ill. Arun acted under the instigation of Imran, and in those circumstances poisoning the wrong cup was a probable consequence of the abetment. As in the first illustration to the section, Imran is liable as if he had abetted the poisoning of the sister directly.

When Section 51 BNS Does Not Apply

  • The act done was not a probable consequence of the abetment
  • The act done was not committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment
  • The person abetted committed the exact act abetted rather than a different act
  • The accused did not abet any act by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid

Section 51 BNS in the IPC (Previous Law)

Section 51 BNS replaces Section 111 IPC from the old criminal code.

Section 111 IPC is replaced by Section 51 BNS. The substantive rule, proviso and three statutory illustrations are retained. In the opening of the proviso, the words Provided that the act done replace the words Provided the act done in the Indian Penal Code. The punishment and legal effect are unchanged.

View IPC Section 111 →

FAQs on Section 51 BNS

Under Section 51 BNS, can I be punished if I abetted one act but the person did something else?▼

Yes, if the different act was a probable result of what you encouraged or helped. The law does not let a person avoid liability merely because the final act took a different form. The link between the original abetment and the act done is the key issue.

Does Section 51 BNS apply even if I did not know the exact act done?▼

It can still apply if the act done was a likely consequence of the original abetment. However, the prosecution must show a real connection between what was planned and what actually happened. Mere remote possibility is not enough.

Is Section 51 BNS a separate offence with its own punishment?▼

No. It is a rule of liability, not a separate offence with a fixed sentence. The punishment depends on the offence actually committed and the legal provision that makes the abettor liable for it.

What is the practical use of Section 51 BNS in court?▼

It helps courts fix responsibility where the final act is not exactly the same as the planned act. This is common in group offences, where events change on the ground but the original abetment still played a role.

Have questions about Section 51 BNS?

Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, punishment details, or how it applies to your situation.

Ask NyayGuru →

Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Bare Act Text, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 · Last updated: 16 Oct 2026 ·