https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308694 Section 34 IPC vicarious liability for murder was not made out because the evidence did not show prior meeting of minds, armed entry, or any shared intention to kill; mere presence at the scene was insufficient to fix constructive liability. In an appeal against acquittal, the view favourable to the accused was preferred where two views were possible, so the conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 was set aside and the accused was acquitted of that charge, while the conviction and sentence under Section 457(1) were maintained. en-us Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:48:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308694 Section 34 IPC vicarious liability for murder was not made out because the evidence did not show prior meeting of minds, armed entry, or any shared intention to kill; mere presence at the scene was insufficient to fix constructive liability. In an appeal against acquittal, the view favourable to the accused was preferred where two views were possible, so the conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 was set aside and the accused was acquitted of that charge, while the conviction and sentence under Section 457(1) were maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308694