Difference between Common Intention and Common Object PPC 1860
The difference between the two concepts is:
The principle of vicarious liability, laid down in section 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code, is an extension of the same principle laid down in section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The only difference between the two is that in the former case the guiding factor is the common object, while in the latter case it is the common intention. (PLD 1959 LAH 405)
Section 34 will not apply unless the accused has actually participated in commission of the offence. In contrast with this u/s. 149, the mere fact that a person is a member of an unlawful assembly at the time when the another member of such assembly commits an offence in prosecution of the object of the assembly, is enough to make the former guilty, though he had not himself in any way taken part in the commission of the crime. (AIR 1963 SC 118)
Commission of Offence
Under s. 149, the offence may be one which is committed in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly or may be one which the members of such unlawful assembly knew to be likely to be committed in the prosecution of such object. But u/s. 34 the criminal act must be done in furtherance of the common intention of the joint criminals. It is not enough if the criminals only knew that such an act was likely to be committed as a result of their activity. [1963 Cri LJ 570]
Spur of a moment
Common intention can be developed even at the spur of the moment, but common object cannot be so developed. Lesser the number of people gathered together, the greater would be chances of developing common intention in the shortest and quickest possible time while the minds of five or more than five persons could not react together. 1998 (PCrLJ 1192)
Number of Persons:
When the offence is committed with a common object by more than five persons then it will amount to an offence u/s. 149 whereas if an offence is committed with a common object by persons less than five, the offence will come u/s.34. (1996 Cri LJ 1429).
The expression common intention implies a pre-concert plan before the act. The common object of an unlawful assembly does not require a prior concert.
The object of unlawful assembly may be common, but this does not mean that the intention of the several members of the unlawful assembly in regard to the things to be done in prosecution of the common object is common. Unless the intention is common s. 34 will not come into play but although the intention is not common. Section 149 may apply. (AIR 1941 Oudh 517