Constructive liability under Section 149 IPC depends on proof of common object, not mere presence in an unlawful assembly.

Section 149 IPC imposes constructive liability only when membership of an unlawful assembly and a shared common object under Section 141 are proved. Mere presence in the assembly is insufficient; the common object may be inferred from the members' acts, weapons, conduct, and surrounding circumstances, and an overt act by each member is not necessary. Liability also arises where the members knew the offence was likely to be committed. On the facts discussed, the prosecution failed to prove the necessary common object against the respondents, and the acquittal was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents' acquittal could be sustained for want of proof of common object so as to attract Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Analysis: Section 149 fastens constructive liability only where membership of an unlawful assembly and the existence of a common object under Section 141 are established. Mere presence in an assembly is insufficient. The common object must be shared by the members and may be inferred from the acts, weapons, conduct, and surrounding circumstances; an overt act by every member is not indispensable. The section operates either where the offence is committed in prosecution of the common object or where the members knew it was likely to be committed. On the facts, the prosecution had not proved the necessary common object against the respondents.

Conclusion: The acquittal of the respondents was / sustainable and the challenge to the High Court's view under Section 149 failed.

---