 Why at all a definition of abettor?

 The reason is that Section 107 defines abet

ment of a thing not abetment of abetment of
an offence
 There may be many abetments of things
which cannot lead to criminal liability because
criminal liability accrues only when a crime is
committed and all abetments of things can
obviously be not be abetments of crime
 Therefore, whenever, an abetment of a thing
will lead to criminal liability had to b stated
 What kind of abetment will bear liability has
been done with incorporating the definition
of abettor who is criminally liable
 That is the reason as to why a separate
definition of abettor had to be given in the
form of a separate section 108
 A young woman, Jameela, was found killed.
At the time of her death, the deceased was in
advance stage of pregnancy. Upon trial the
two accused were found guilty of the offences
punishable under Ss. 120-B and 302 besides
S. 109 of the Indian Penal Code,1860.
 Aggrieved by the judgment of the Sessions
Court, both the accused persons filed appeal
before the High Court, which was dismissed.
The apex court held that there is no direct
evidence either regarding abetment or the
criminal conspiracy attributable to the
appellant.
 Both the offences are held to be proved on
the basis of circumstantial evidence.
 Hence, the appellant could not have been
convicted and sentenced with the aid of S.
120-B or S. 109 IPC.
 The court further held that to prove the
charge of abetment, the prosecution is
required to prove that the abettor had
instigated for the doing of a particular thing
or engaged with one or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of
that thing or intentionally aided by an act of
illegal omission, doing of that thing.
 The prosecution failed to prove the existence
of any of the ingredients of S. 107 IPC
 Abetment by conspiracy: A person is said to
abet the commission of an offence by
conspiracy, if he enters into an agreement
with one or more persons to do a legal act by
illegal means, or to do an illegal act, and
some act is don e in pursuance thereof.
 A conspiracy to do a thin g is a combination
of two or more persons with a common
design of doing a specific thing.
 It has been held that where a criminal
conspiracy amounts to an abetment under S.
107, it is unnecessary to invoke the
provisions of Ss. 120-A and 120-B, as the
Cod e has made a specific provision for the
punishment of such a conspiracy.
 Aiding and abetting of an offence are
different from actual participation in a crime.
Hence, where the accused have been charged
with actual participation in a crime but are
only found to have aided and abetted the
commission of the crime, they cannot be
convicted of the crime charged.
 However, insignificant the aid may be, it
would be abetment if it was given with the
requisite intention or knowledge.
 The test is not to determine whether the
offence would or would not have been
committed if the aid had not been given but
whether the act was committed with the aid
of the abettor in question.
 Section 108A was added in the Penal Code in
1898 with a view to overrule a decision of the
Bombay High Court in the case of Queen
Empress v. Ganapatrao Ramachandra((1984)
ILR 19 Bom 1050 in which it was held that
the abetment in India by an Indian citizen of
an offence committed in a foreign country
was not punishable under the Code.
 The section states that a person would be
guilty of an abetment, if he abets the
commission of an act outside India, which if
done in India, would constitute an offence.