111. Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done

When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directlv abetted it:

•

Provided that the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment, and was committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment.

Illustr-uf ions

A instigates a child to put poison into the food of Z and gives him poison for that purpose. The child, in consequence of the instigation, by mistake puts the poison into the food of Z which is by the side of that of Z. Here, if the child was acting under the influence of A's instigation and the act done was under the circumstances a probable consequence of

A instigates B to burn Z's house. B sets fire to the house and at the same time commits theft of property there. A , though guilty of abetting the burning of the house, is not guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a distinct act and not a probable consequence of the burning.

A instigates B and C to break into an inhabited house at midnight for the purpose of robbery and provides them with arms for that purpose. B and C break into the house, and being resisted by Z, one of the inmates, murder Z. Here. if that murder was the probable consequence of the abetment. A is liable to the punishment provided for murder.