सं Samvidhan

IPC · Chapter 5

Abetment — MCQs with answers

82 exam-style questions on this chapter, written from the actual legal text and tagged for UPSC, Judiciary and CLAT. Five are shown below with answers and explanations — the rest are in the free interactive drill.

Q1 · easy · IPC S.107

Which of the following describes one way a person abets the doing of a thing under Section 107 IPC?

  1. A.Instigates any person to do that thing✓ correct
  2. B.Merely advises caution without urging action
  3. C.Is present at the scene without acting
  4. D.Accidentally causes the thing by mistake

Why: The provision expressly states that a person abets who “Instigates any person to do that thing.” The other options are not mentioned as constituting abetment in the text.

Read Section 107 — Abetment of a thing →

Q2 · easy · IPC S.107

According to Section 107 IPC, which of these clearly constitutes abetment by omission or act?

  1. A.Expressing sympathy after the act
  2. B.Giving vague moral support
  3. C.Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing✓ correct
  4. D.Being merely present and watching without acting

Why: The third limb of the provision states: “Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.” Mere sympathy, vague support, or mere presence are not specified in the text as abetment.

Read Section 107 — Abetment of a thing →

Q3 · medium · IPC S.107

If several persons enter into a conspiracy to do a thing but no act or illegal omission ever takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, does Section 107 IPC classify each participant as having abetted the thing?

  1. A.Yes, mere engagement in a conspiracy is sufficient
  2. B.No, abetment under the conspiracy limb requires that an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of the conspiracy✓ correct
  3. C.Yes, if the conspiracy is proven even without any act
  4. D.Only if one of them later instigates another person

Why: The second limb requires that the person “engages... in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy.” If no such act or omission takes place, the text does not treat mere conspiracy alone as abetment.

Read Section 107 — Abetment of a thing →

Q4 · medium · IPC S.107

An act occurs after a conspiracy is formed, but that act was not done in order to the doing of the thing agreed in the conspiracy. Under Section 107 IPC, does this result in abetment by the conspirators?

  1. A.Yes, any act following a conspiracy makes the conspirators abettors
  2. B.No, because the act must take place both in pursuance of the conspiracy and in order to the doing of that thing✓ correct
  3. C.Yes, if the act is illegal even if unrelated to the conspiracy's object
  4. D.Only if one conspirator also instigated someone else to perform the act

Why: The provision specifies the conspiracy limb applies when “an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing.” If the act is not in order to the doing of the thing, the textual condition for abetment is not satisfied.

Read Section 107 — Abetment of a thing →

Q5 · hard · IPC S.107

Which part of Section 107 IPC is explicitly qualified by the word “intentionally”?

  1. A.The instigation limb (“Instigates any person to do that thing”)
  2. B.The conspiracy limb (engaging in a conspiracy)
  3. C.The aiding limb (“aids, by any act or illegal omission”)✓ correct
  4. D.All three limbs are explicitly qualified by the word “intentionally”

Why: Only the third limb of the provision uses the word “Intentionally”: “Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.” The first and second limbs as printed do not carry the explicit adverb “intentionally.”

Read Section 107 — Abetment of a thing →

77 more questions on Abetment

Drill them interactively — instant feedback, links to every provision, and your accuracy tracked on the syllabus map. Free.

Start the free drill →

Questions are AI-generated from the legal text, machine-verified against the provision, and editorially reviewable. Education, not legal advice.