Rioting and Affray

In one line

Rioting is an unlawful assembly that uses force; an affray is two or more people fighting in a public place and disturbing the peace.

In the wording a student can write in an exam: section 191(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provides that whenever force or violence is used by an unlawful assembly, or by any member of it, in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, every member of that assembly is guilty of the offence of rioting; and section 194(1) provides that when two or more persons, by fighting in a public place, disturb the public peace, they are said to commit an affray.

Rioting

Section 191(1). Whenever force or violence is used by an unlawful assembly, or by any member of it, in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, every member of that assembly is guilty of the offence of rioting.

The ingredients. An unlawful assembly, as defined in section 189(1); force or violence used by it or by any member; and the use being in prosecution of the common object. Every member is then guilty, whether or not he used any force himself, which makes rioting the third of the vicarious provisions in this topic.

The punishments. Section 191(2), imprisonment of either description up to two years, or fine, or both. Section 191(3), where the rioter is armed with a deadly weapon or with anything which used as a weapon of offence is likely to cause death, up to five years, or fine, or both.

The relationship with unlawful assembly. Every riot presupposes an unlawful assembly. Not every unlawful assembly is a riot: the assembly becomes a riot only when force or violence is used in prosecution of the object. So a crowd assembled with a forbidden object which disperses without violence has committed the offence in section 189(2) and not rioting.

Provoking a riot

Section 192. Whoever malignantly, or wantonly by doing anything which is illegal, gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it likely that the provocation will cause the offence of rioting to be committed, is punished with imprisonment up to one year, or fine, or both, if rioting is committed in consequence, and up to six months, or fine, or both, if it is not.

The provision is the counterpart of abetment for this offence: it punishes the person who sets a crowd off, and it punishes him whether or not the riot follows.

The liability of the owner or occupier of the land

Section 193 is unusual and is worth an answer in itself, because it punishes a person for what a crowd did on his land.

Sub-section (1). Whenever an unlawful assembly or riot takes place, the owner or occupier of the land on which it is held, and any person having or claiming an interest in that land, is punishable with a fine not exceeding one thousand rupees if he, or his agent or manager, knowing that the offence is being or has been committed, or having reason to believe it likely to be committed, does not give the earliest notice in his power to the officer in charge at the nearest police station, and does not, where he had reason to believe it was about to be committed, use all lawful means in his power to prevent it, and, if it takes place, to disperse or suppress it.