Whoever malignantly, or wantonly, by doing anything which is illegal, gives provocation to any person intending of knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause the offence of rioting to be committed, shall, if the offence of rioting be committed in consequence of such provocation, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both ; and if the offence of rioting be not committed, imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Para I

Punishment—Imprisonment for 1 year, or fine, or both—Cognizable—Bailable—Triable by any Magistrate—Non-compoundable.

Para II

Punishment—Imprisonment for 6 months, or fine, or both—Cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable.

Whoever assaults or threatens to assault, or obstructs or attempts to obstruct, any public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant, in endeavouring to disperse an unlawful assembly, or to suppress a riot or affray, or uses, or threatens, or attempts to use criminal force to such public servant, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both—Cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compound­able.

Whoever knowingly joins or continues in any assembly of five or more persons likely to cause a disturbance of the public peace, after such assembly has been lawfully commanded to disperse, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.

Explanation

If the assembly is an unlawful assembly with the meaning of section 141, the offender will be punishable under section 145.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Imprisonment for 6 months, or fine, or both—Cogniza­ble—Bailable—Triable by any Magistrate—Non-compoundable.

Whoever hires or engages, or employs, or promotes, or connives at the hiring, engagement or employment of any person to join or become a member of any unlawful assembly, shall be punishable as a member of such unlawful assembly, and for any offence which may be committed by any such person as a member of such unlawful assembly in pursuance of such hiring, engagement or employment, in the same manner as if he had been a member of such unlawful assembly, or himself had committed such offence.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—The same as for a member of such assembly, and for any offence committed by any members of such assembly—Cognizable—According as offence is bailable or non-bailable—Triable by court by which the offence is triable—Non-compoundable.

If an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, or such as the members or that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object, every person who, at the time of the committing of that offence, is a member of the same assembly, is guilty of that offence.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—The same as for the offence—According as offence is cognizable or non-cognizable—According as offence is bailable or non-bailable—Triable by court by which the offence is triable—Non-compoundable.

COMMENTS

Scope and applicability

(i) When the charge is under section 149, the presence of the accused as part of unlawful assembly is sufficient for conviction even if no overt act is imputed to him; Yunis alias Kariya v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2003 SC 539.

(ii) Conviction by taking recourse to section 149 cannot be made out unless five specified objects enumerated in section 141 are not proved; Ramashish v. State of Bihar, 1999 (6) JT 560: 1999 (2) JCC (SC) 471.

(iii) Even if no overt act is imputed to a particular person, when the charge is under section 149, the presence of the accused as part of unlawful assembly is sufficient for conviction; Yunis alias Kariya v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2003 SC 539.

Joint liability of members of unlawful assembly

(i) It is well settled that once a membership of an unlawful assembly is established, it is not incumbent on the prosecution to establish whether any specific overt act has been assigned to any accused. Mere membership of the unlawful assembly is sufficient; State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel Koli, (1997) 2 Crimes 228 (Bom).

(ii) Every member of an unlawful assembly is vicariously liable for the acts done by others either in the prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly or such which the members of the unlawful assembly knew were likely to be committed; State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel Koli, (1997) 2 Crimes 228 (Bom).