Whether the appellant could be held liable for the offense of Murder?
It was also argued by the appellant’s side that if the court holds that the section 34 is so important, then section 149 should be regarded as an otiose. But the court held that the two sections i.e. section 34 and section 149 may be overlapping but are not exactly the same hence one cannot replace the other.
Whether the appellant has been rightly convicted of murder upon the true construction of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?
The essence of the liability is to be found in the existence of a common intention animating the accused leading to the doing of a criminal act in furtherance of such intention.
Whether a lady can be prosecuted for gang rape?
The sine qua non for bringing in the application of Section 34 IPC is that the act must be done in furtherance of the common intention to do a criminal act. The expression "in furtherance of their common intention" as appearing in the explanation to Section 376(2) relates to intention to commit rape and a woman cannot be said to have an intention to commit rape.
Whether all the members of the assembly could be held equally liable for the murder of the constables?
Section 149 applies not only to offences actually committed in pursuance of the common object but also to offences that members of the assembly know are likely to be committed.