The case of Barendra Kumar Ghose v. King-Emperor (AIR 1925 PC 1) was a landmark judgment delivered by the Privy Council in 1925 that dealt with the concept of common intention under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Barendra Kumar Ghose was accused of participating in a robbery and murder at a post office. While he did not directly kill the victim, the prosecution argued that he shared a common intention with his accomplices to rob and, if necessary, kill the postmaster.

The key legal issue was whether Ghose could be held liable for murder even if he didn't fire the fatal shot, based on the principle of common intention. The Privy Council upheld the conviction, stating that when several individuals share a common intention to commit a crime, each person is liable for the acts of others undertaken in furtherance of that shared plan.

This established the principle that vicarious liability can arise under Section 34 of the IPC, making each participant responsible for the consequences of their collective actions. This case has had a significant impact on Indian criminal law, clarifying the application of Section 34 and expanding the scope of criminal liability.