Criminal Conspiracy...

CONSPIRACY:
Section 120A of the I.P.C. defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement of two

or more persons to do or cause to be done:
1. An illegal act, or;
2. An act that is not illegal by illegal means.
Conspiracy means a combination of two or more persons for unlawful purposes.
It is an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act.
Criminal conspiracy is a substantive offence under the Indian Penal Code,
1860(I.P.C.). Generally, the accused is charged with the offence of criminal
conspiracy along with the charge of some other substantive offence under the
I.P.C. or any other law. Chapter V-A of the I.P.C. as inserted in 1913 deals with
the offence of criminal conspiracy.
ESSENTIALS:
1. There should be an agreement between two or more persons: If the
conspirators commit several offences in accordance with the criminal
conspiracy, all of them shall be liable for the offences, even if some of
them did not actively participate in the commission of the crime.
2. Such an agreement should be done:
(a) To do an illegal act
To make a person liable for the criminal conspiracy, the agreement must
be to do any act which is either forbidden by law or is opposed to the law.
(b) Or to do a legal act by illegal means
3. When any act is done even though it is lawful but done by illegal means,
it constitutes criminal conspiracy.
4. The agreement may be expressed or implied or partly expressed and
partly implied.
5. As soon as the agreement is made, the conspiracy arises, and the offence
is committed
6. And, the same offence is continued to be committed so long as the
combination persists.
PROOF OF CONSPIRACY:
The offence of criminal conspiracy can be proved by either direct or
circumstantial evidence. A conspiracy is usually hatched in a secret and private
setting which is why it is almost impossible to produce any affirmative evidence
about the date of the formation of the criminal conspiracy, the persons involved
in it or the object of such conspiracy or how such object is to be carried out. All
of this is more or less a matter of inference.
It was believed that agreement or meeting of minds is the one of the main
evidence to prove the conspiracy under this section & also it is one of the
hardest one to prove because as we all known to the fact that offender by
himself does not agree to a fact that he is involved with someone.
It is only matter of circumstances that one can prove that there is a meeting of
minds or an agreement between those two. Hence, criminal conspiracy is based
on circumstantial evidence in most of the cases there is no direct evidence to
prove the same. Also, point to be noted that there is no conspiracy between
husband & wife because they are considered as the one person.
PUNISHMENT:
Punishment for criminal conspiracy is contained under section 120B of the
Indian Penal Code. The punishment for Section 120A (criminal conspiracy)
depends upon the nature of the offence. If the agreement is to commit a serious
offence, the punishment is more severe.
Where a person conspires to commit an offence that is punishable either by

death or by imprisonment of life or by rigorous imprisonment for a term of two
years or above, and no express provision is made in the Code for its
punishment, then he will be liable for punishment in the same manner as if he
had abetted such an offence. Abet means to encourage or assist someone in
doing a crime.
If the conspiracy exists between two or more persons to commit an offence

which is not mentioned above, that is, offences which are not punishable with
death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two or more
than two years, such a person will be punished with the imprisonment of either
description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine, or with both.
CASE LAWS:
Kehar Singh and Others Vs State (Delhi Administration) (1988):
The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in this case, has held that the most important
ingredient of the offence of conspiracy is an agreement between two or more
persons to do an illegal act. Such an illegal act may or may not be done in
pursuance of the agreement, but the very agreement is an offence and is
punishable.
Major E.G. Barsay Vs The State Of Bombay (1962):
In this case, it was held that an agreement to break the law constitutes the gist of
the offence of criminal conspiracy under Section 120A IPC. The parties to such
an agreement are guilty of criminal conspiracy even if the illegal act agreed to
be done by them has not been done. The Court also held that it is not an
ingredient of the offence of criminal conspiracy that all the parties should agree
to do a single illegal act and a conspiracy may comprise the commission of
several acts.
Param Hans Yadav Vs State Of Bihar, 1987:

In this case, it was observed that it is difficult to support the charges of
conspiracy with direct evidence the only way by which the one can prove is
criminal conspiracy the prosecution has to establish the link between the
different chain events.

Criminal Conspiracy...

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Conspiracy...

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Conspiracy...

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONSPIRACY:

Section 120A of the I.P.C. defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement of two

Where a person conspires to commit an offence that is punishable either by

If the conspiracy exists between two or more persons to commit an offence

Param Hans Yadav Vs State Of Bihar, 1987:

You might also like