Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    Accomplice

    Uploaded by

    malikanisarkar
    Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with accomplices in crimes. An accomplice is someone who participates in the commission of a crime along with others. There are different types of accomplices including principal offenders who commit the crime, abettors who aid the crime, accessories before the fact who counsel or procure the crime, and accessories after the fact who help the accused after the crime. While an accomplice is a competent witness against an accused, their testimony is not considered reliable on its own and requires corroboration with other evidence to support a conviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Accomplice

    Uploaded by

    malikanisarkar
    15 views2 pages
    Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with accomplices in crimes. An accomplice is someone who participates in the commission of a crime along with others. There are different types of accomplices including principal offenders who commit the crime, abettors who aid the crime, accessories before the fact who counsel or procure the crime, and accessories after the fact who help the accused after the crime. While an accomplice is a competent witness against an accused, their testimony is not considered reliable on its own and requires corroboration with other evidence to support a conviction.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with accomplices in crimes. An accomplice is someone who participates in the commission of a crime along with others. There are different types of accomplices including principal offenders who commit the crime, abettors who aid the crime, accessories before the fact who counsel or procure the crime, and accessories after the fact who help the accused after the crime. While an accomplice is a competent witness against an accused, their testimony is not considered reliable on its own and requires corroboration with other evidence to support a conviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    15 views2 pages

    Accomplice

    Uploaded by

    malikanisarkar
    Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with accomplices in crimes. An accomplice is someone who participates in the commission of a crime along with others. There are different types of accomplices including principal offenders who commit the crime, abettors who aid the crime, accessories before the fact who counsel or procure the crime, and accessories after the fact who help the accused after the crime. While an accomplice is a competent witness against an accused, their testimony is not considered reliable on its own and requires corroboration with other evidence to support a conviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Accomplice | 06 Dec 2023

    Introduction

    Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) deals with the concept of Accomplice. The
    word accomplice has not been defined in the Act.

    An accomplice means a person who has taken part in the commission of a crime, when
    an offence is committed by more than one person and everyone participating in its
    commission is an accomplice.

    Section 133, IEA

    Section 133 of IEA states that an accomplice shall be a competent witness against an
    accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the
    uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.

    Types of Accomplices

    Principal offender of First Degree:


    The principal offender of first degree is a person who actually commits the crime.
    There can be multiple persons who committed the crime together, each one of them
    will be principal offenders.
    Principal offender of the Second Degree:
    The principal offender of the second degree is a person who either abets or aids
    the commission of the crime.
    This refers to someone who is present at the crime scene and helps the principal
    offender in any way.
    Accessories before the fact:
    They are the persons who abet, incite, procure, or counsel for the commission of
    a crime and they do not themselves participate in the commission of the crime.
    Accessories after the fact:
    A person is an accessory after the fact when a person with the knowledge that the
    accused has committed some crime receives him, comforts him or assists him to
    help escape from punishment a crime or helps him escape arrest, exercising his free
    will allowing him to escape, or opposes his arrest.

    Evidentiary value of testimony of accomplice

    When an accomplice makes a testimony, it is not seen as reliable evidence for a


    conviction, and it has to be verified with other material evidence; this is called
    corroboration.
    The reason behind not considering the evidence provided by the accomplice is to protect
    himself as he may go against the co-accused, but this does not mean that the court
    cannot rely on the evidence of the accomplice.
    An accomplice shall be a competent witness as against the accused person and a
    conviction of the accused based on the testimony of an accomplice is valid even though
    it is not corroborated in material particulars.

    Related Case Laws


    In Chandan v. Emperor (1930), the Allahabad High Court defined accomplice as one
    who is associated with an offender or offenders in the commission of a crime or one
    who knowingly or voluntarily helps and cooperates with others in the commission of the
    crime.
    In Shanker v State of Tamil Nadu (1994), the Supreme Court held that when an
    accomplice becomes an approver, he eventually becomes a prosecution witness.
    In State of Rajasthan v. Bal Veera (2014), the Supreme Court held that an accomplice
    will be presumed unworthy until and unless the evidence or testimony provided by
    him is corroborated by some other material evidence.

    You might also like