The court discusses the distinction between section 34 and 149 of IPC. Common object does not necessarily require proof of a prior meeting of minds or pre-consort, whereas common intention suggests activity in concert and presupposes the existence of a prepared plan, implying a prior meeting of minds. However, both deal with vicarious liability of a person for the acts of others. Further, it overlaps in a way that if several persons numbering five or more do an act or intend to do it but section 34 and section 149 may apply.
