Exclusion of collective liability under unlawful assembly without common object

Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code fastens vicarious criminal liability upon every member of an unlawful assembly for offences committed in prosecution of a common object. However, the foundational prerequisite for invoking this section is the establishment of an unlawful assembly sharing a distinct, shared common criminal objective. In chaotic group fights where neighbors or rival factions rush to a spot spontaneously and attack each other amidst a sudden commotion, a common object cannot be readily inferred. When individuals from both sides participate in a free fight and suffer mutual bodily injuries, the incident ceases to be a pre-planned enterprise executed by an unlawful assembly. Courts cannot apply Section 149 mechanically to every participant in a multi-party brawl without concrete proof of prior concert or shared design. Consequently, charges relating to rioting armed with deadly weapons under Sections 147 and 148, along with Section 149, fail when the evidence points to a sudden, free-for-all scuffle. The failure to prove a common object dismantles collective guilt and compels the court to examine the specific, individualized role played by each accused person. Individual culpability must then be established based on direct overt acts rather than generalized vicarious imputation. Thus, the exclusion of collective liability protects individuals from being penalized for crimes they did not personally orchestrate or intend. (Shrikrishna v. The State of Madhya Pradesh | 2026 INSC 45)