Criminalization Of Mob Violence Against Alleged Criminals
1. Introduction: Mob Violence Against Alleged Criminals
Mob violence occurs when a group of people take the law into their own hands to punish someone they believe has committed a crime. This is often referred to as “lynching” or “vigilantism.”
Key Legal Concerns:
Mob violence violates due process of law.
Perpetrators can be charged with murder, culpable homicide, rioting, unlawful assembly, and criminal conspiracy under IPC.
Victim identity is irrelevant; even alleged criminals have a right to legal protection.
Relevant IPC Sections (India):
Section 141-147 IPC: Unlawful assembly and rioting.
Section 302 IPC: Murder.
Section 304 IPC: Culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Section 323 IPC: Voluntarily causing hurt.
Section 149 IPC: Liability of members of an unlawful assembly for acts committed in prosecution of common object.
Key Principles:
Collective criminal liability: Each member of the mob can be held responsible under Section 149 IPC.
Intention is inferred from acts: Even if an individual did not physically assault the victim, participation or encouragement can constitute liability.
Vigilantism is illegal: Taking the law into one’s hands cannot justify violence.
2. Case Law Illustrations
Case 1: State of Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan (1998)
Facts:
A mob attacked a man accused of theft in a rural village.
Victim was severely injured and later died.
Prosecution Issues:
Identifying individual members of the mob.
Establishing common intention.
Judgment & Principle:
Court convicted multiple members for murder under Section 302 and unlawful assembly under Section 147.
Principle: Members of a mob share criminal liability if their actions contribute to the outcome, even if they did not strike the fatal blow.
Case 2: Md. Shafi v. State of Kerala (2005)
Facts:
A man accused of child theft was attacked by a group of villagers and sustained fatal injuries.
Prosecution Evidence:
Eyewitness testimony of neighbors.
Medical evidence of injuries.
Judgment & Principle:
Convictions upheld under Sections 302, 323, and 149 IPC.
Principle: Fear or suspicion of criminality does not absolve mob participants. Law treats alleged criminals as protected under criminal justice system.
Case 3: Tejpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2010)
Facts:
Alleged thief was beaten by a crowd at a railway station.
Several bystanders filmed the attack.
Prosecution Challenges:
Differentiating direct participants from onlookers.
Establishing intent to kill.
Judgment & Principle:
Court held that all active participants and organizers of the mob could be charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 IPC) and unlawful assembly (Sections 141-147 IPC).
Principle: Mob violence cannot be justified by alleged criminal acts of the victim; collective liability applies.
Case 4: State v. Rajendra & Ors. (2014)
Facts:
Alleged burglar was attacked by villagers after being caught in the act.
Mob used sticks and stones; victim succumbed to injuries.
Prosecution Evidence:
Witnesses identified 12 members of the mob.
Medical report confirmed blunt-force trauma.
Judgment & Principle:
Court convicted for murder, rioting, and unlawful assembly.
Principle: Participation in mob violence to punish an alleged criminal is treated as premeditated criminal act; legal system requires due process.
Case 5: Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan (2017)
Facts:
A man accused of theft in a small town was dragged by a mob and beaten to death.
Prosecution Issues:
Establishing chain of causation for death.
Proving that mob intended to inflict grievous harm.
Judgment & Principle:
Court relied on eyewitnesses, forensic evidence, and video recordings.
Convictions under Sections 302, 323, 147, 148, and 149 IPC.
Principle: Lynching of alleged criminals is strictly punishable, and all mob members may face liability for murder and rioting.
3. Key Takeaways
Alleged criminal status does not justify mob violence. The law protects all citizens until proven guilty.
Collective liability under Section 149 IPC means that even passive participants can be criminally responsible.
Eyewitness, medical, and forensic evidence are crucial to prosecute mob attacks.
Legal penalties can include murder, rioting, culpable homicide, and voluntarily causing hurt, depending on intent and severity.
Courts consistently reject vigilantism, reinforcing that taking the law into one’s own hands is criminal.
In conclusion, mob violence against alleged criminals is criminalized across jurisdictions, and Indian courts have repeatedly held that all participants can be held liable, emphasizing the supremacy of legal process over vigilante justice.
RELATED Blog
comments