COMMON AND
SIMILAR INTENTION
BY: K H U S H I S H A R M A
BALLB (A)
R E G N O. : 2 2 1 3 0 1 0 7 4
INTRODUCTION
Common and similar intention are two distinct terms under criminal law. Usually
they are understood by people synonymously but they definitiely have some key
differences. Even though both of these include the having of a common
objective, they do not mean the aame thing.
Common and similar intentions are key terms used while determining crimes
which involve a group of personsns rather than a single individual.
Understanding these concpets is important in determining the liability of such
group of persons and of every person separately.
DEFINITIONS
COMMON INTENTION: Common intention refers to a situation
where two or more individuals have a shared goal or plan to
commit a crime. When several people commit a criminal act in
furtherance of a common intention, each of them is liable for the
act in the same way as if he did it alone.
SIMILAR INTENTION: When two or more people act with a
similar intention but without a pre-arranged plan or a shared
understanding. This however does not include the process of
joint planning and execution therefore, no common intention is
established.
ELEMETS OF COMMON
INTENTION
Following are the essentials of a common intention:
1. A Criminal act
2. Must be done by two or more persons
3. All persons acting must have a common intention
4. Persons involved are liable for the act done
5. Every person shall be held liable in the manner as if he had done that act
alone.
ELEMENTS OF SIMILAR
INTENTION
Following are the essentials of a similar intention:
1. Involvement of two or more persons
2. No pre-arranged plan or shared understanding
3. No formal agreement
PROVISION IN BNS
Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita talks about the concept of COMMON
INTENTION. It states:
When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all,
each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
It is however silent on the topic of SIMILAR INTENTION.
SEC 35 OF IPC
Our old criminal statute, The Indian Penal Code, Section 35 spoke over the concept of
‘COMMON INTENTION’. It stated:
That have been done by several persons in furtherance of their common
intention. As per this section it states that when a criminal act is committed
by several individuals who share a common intention, than in that case each
of them will be held equally liable as if they have committed the act
individually. This provision is very essential for addressing collective criminal
behaviour and ensuring that all co-accused are held equally responsible for
their involvement and participation in the crime.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
COMMON AND SIMILAR
INTENTION
1. The crucial difference between both of these concepts lies in the degree of coordination and
the degree of pre-planning involved.
2. Common intention requires a clear understanding and agreement between individuals.
3. Similar intention on the other hand implies independent actions with similar goals.
EXAMPLES OF COMMON AND
SIMILAR INTENTION
COMMON INTENTION SIMILAR INTENTION
*A group of individuals plans a bank heist. *A group of people gather to protest a
government decision.
*They discuss the plan, assign roles, and
coordinate their actions. *Some individuals in the crowd start
vandalizing property and assaulting people.
*They arrive at the bank together, execute the
robbery, and escape together. *While they are acting together, there is no
pre-planned agreement or coordination.
*This is a clear example of common intention.
*This is an example of similar intention.
IMPORTANT CASE LAWS
RELATED TO COMMON
INTENTION
Kali Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh: This case clarified that common
intention must be proven through direct or circumstantial evidence,
highlighting the necessity of a clear shared objective among co-accused
State of Maharashtra v. Shrihari: The Supreme Court emphasized the
need for evidence of a prearranged plan to establish common intention,
ensuring that all participants are held accountable based on their collective
intent
State of Maharashtra v. Shrihari: The Supreme Court emphasized the
need for evidence of a prearranged plan to establish common intention,
ensuring that all participants are held accountable based on their collective
intent
SUMMARY
Common Intention Similar Intention
Planning Pre-planned and agreed upon No prior planning or agreement
Action Collective action Individual actions
Liability Joint liability Individual liability
Understanding the difference between similar and common intentions is crucial in determining criminal
liability and assigning punishments to the offenders.
