*Vasant V. The State of Karnataka (2025 SC)* Part-C 12. There may even be cases where a person might be found guilty of an offence u/s. 149 IPC though it was committed quite contrary to his own intention. 13. ⁠Supposing for instance, an unlawful assembly is formed with the object of wiping out all members of a particular community residing in a mohalla. While this assembly is busy in its unlawful activities, some of its members might come across a member of the other community and might in prosecution of the common object proceed to murder him. 14. ⁠But a particular individual, say X, who is a member of this very unlawful assembly might discover that Y was his old friend. X might not want that this old friend of his should be killed, and in spite of his wishes, and contrary to his intentions, Y might be murdered. 15. ⁠If it so happens, then X who was a member of the unlawful assembly, might be held to be guilty of an offence committed by another member of the said assembly, even though the offence itself was committed quite contrary to his desires and even in opposition to his own intention provided it is shown that X continued to remain a member of the assembly at the time of the offence and the offence itself was directly or indirectly within the purview of the common object of the assembly. 16. ⁠The reason is that the criminal liability u/s. 149 IPC is determined not by the intention of the various individual members constituting it but by the common object of the assembly as a whole.