Do you want to know about the Concept of Criminal Conspiracy? Then, read this article to learn about the Concept of Criminal Conspiracy.
Introduction:
This article is dedicated to exploring the concept of Criminal Conspiracy in detail. An agreement between two or more people to carry out a legal act using illegal methods, or to perform an illegal act altogether, is referred to as a criminal conspiracy. The Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 120A, addresses this terrible violation. To help readers understand the topic better, the article provides several examples and case laws related to the concept of Criminal Conspiracy. It also highlights that Criminal Conspiracy is considered a substantive offence, which means that an accused can be charged with Criminal Conspiracy alongside another offence as per the Indian Penal Code or any other law in India. It is crucial to remember that criminal conspiracy is a complicated idea that has to be carefully thought out. The article explains that even if the illegal act is not carried out, an agreement to commit such an act is still a criminal offence. This is because the law recognizes that the act of conspiring to commit a crime can be just as harmful as the crime itself. The article’s overall goal is to provide readers with a thorough grasp of criminal conspiracy, its legal ramifications, and the significance of abiding by the law in your area.
History:
A conspiracy occurs when two or more persons decide to commit an unlawful act. It is a serious crime that was first recognized by the Star Chamber in 1611. In the Poulterer case, Walter and others falsely accused Stone of stealing. They ruined his reputation by spreading rumours that he was dishonest. However, Stone had evidence to show he was not there when the theft occurred and was not involved. The court found him innocent. After this incident, Stone tried to clear his name. The defendants tried to resolve the issue outside of court, but they bribed some witnesses and accused Stone of making repeated fraudulent claims. The court held that even a small amount of planning between the defendants would make it a crime, even if Stone was not guilty. Before the Criminal
Law Amendment Act of 1913, there were two ways to punish conspiracy: for helping someone commit a crime, or for being involved in a specific crime. In 1870, a new law was added stating that conspiring to fight against the government of India was a crime. But it wasn’t until 1913 that Criminal Conspiracy became a crime in its own right. This means that if someone agrees to do something illegal with someone else, they can be charged with Conspiracy, even if they don’t do it. It must be demonstrated that two or more persons conspired to accomplish something illegal using criminal means to establish conspiracy. This is against the law and is taken very seriously. In the case of Poulterer, Walter, and other defendants falsely accused Stone of theft and made several attempts to ruin his reputation.
They even spread rumours about Stone’s character, accusing him of being dishonest. However, Stone had a witness to support him and brought nearly 30 people to testify that he was in London when the robbery took place. As a result, the Jury discharged Stone because they believed he was an ignorant and harmless person. Following this incident, Stone went to the Star Chamber to clear his name and reputation. The defendants tried to resolve the issue outside of court by persuading Stone to drop the case. When the process began, the defendants bribed some of the witnesses and accused Stone of barratry, which meant making repeated and fraudulent claims in court.
The court decided that regardless of whether Stone was wrongly charged or found not guilty, even a slight conspiracy among the defendants could be considered an offence and could be prosecuted as a crime. In Mulcahy v. R. (1868), the House of Lords ruled that conduct must entail the purpose of two or more individuals to perform an unlawful act and an agreement to carry out the act using unlawful methods for it to be classified as a conspiracy. Before the inclusion of Chapter V-A in the Indian Penal Code,
Conspiracy was punishable in two ways: in the form of abetment under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code and the form of involvement in a specific offence under Section 310, Section 400, and Section 401 of the Indian Penal Code. In 1870, Section 121A was added to the Indian Penal Code, stating that offences for Conspiracy would be punished under Section 121, which is a conspiracy to attempt to fight a war against the Government of India. The term Conspiracy was not considered a crime under the Indian Penal Code of 1913. when the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1913 introduced Chapter V-A in the IPC, it considered this kind of offence to be substantive.
This implies that an individual may face charges in addition to the conspiracy violation. To prove the crime of Conspiracy, it must be established that two or more people agreed to carry out an unlawful act using unlawful means. This is punishable by law, regardless of whether the illegal act was carried out or not. To sum up, conspiracy is a serious crime that entails two or more persons deciding to carry out illegal conduct by illegal methods. As a result, it is illegal. The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1913 added Chapter V-A to the Indian Penal Code, making this crime a serious one. As a result, it’s critical to comprehend the legal ramifications of conspiracy and abstain from such illegal activity.
MEANING OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
SECTION 120A I.P.C
Criminal conspiracy is defined as an agreement between two or more people to perform, or cause to be done, one of the following crimes:
- An illegal act
- An act that is not unlawful by illegal means
In the Indian Penal Code, the term illegal is defined under Section 43 as an offence that is prohibited by law or provides a ground for civil action. Even a small basic agreement to commit an offence shall be considered to commit Criminal Conspiracy and no act or illegal omission is required to be proved about the provision attached to Section 120A. Such an act is only necessary when the conspiracy’s goal is to carry out illegal conduct that doesn’t include murder. The fact whether the illegal act is an ultimate object or just incidental is irrelevant to the object.
INGREDIENTS
- There must be two or more persons who together agree to do or cause an illegal act or do an act by illegal means that is there must at least be two persons who conspire together. A person can be given punishment if the other person (the other person whom he conspired with) is unknown, missing or even dead.
- It is necessary to have the common bad purpose to commit a criminal act or an act that is not prohibited by using illegal methods.
PUNISHMENT OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
Under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code punishment is specified for Criminal Conspiracy:
- When a major crime is the intended victim of a criminal conspiracy: If the plot involves committing an offence
- Punished with a death sentence
- Imprisoned for life
- A strict imprisonment for a period of two or more years
- At least where no punishment is stated under the code regarding that particular conspiracy.
All the persons who have committed the offence of Criminal Conspiracy will be punished in the same manner that is been stated above. Any person who is involved in committing such an offence shall be imprisoned for at least a period that is not less than six months or a fine or at times even both.
EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
A person can prove that the other party has committed the offence of Criminal Conspiracy either by providing direct or circumstantial (indirect) evidence. Generally, conspiracy is planned secretly and privately and that is the main reason why it is very difficult to produce strong evidence to support the claim regarding the date when the conspiracy was planned, the total number of persons involved in it, the object of such conspiracy and regarding how the conspiracy is said to be carried out.
SECTION 10 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT,1872
One of the main principles that has been stated under Section 10 of The Indian Evidence Act 1872 is that once conspiracy to do an illegal act has been proved an act of one member of the conspiracy becomes the act of another who took part in the same plan. Furthermore, Section 10 addresses the need to be legitimate or acceptable, particularly when used as evidence in a court of law.
Further, it is been stated that anything that is done or is written even by one of the conspirators about their common intention acts valid against all the conspirators for proving the existence of the conspiracy or if any other person was a party to the conspiracy. Following are some conditions that are necessary before such fact can be admitted-
Initially, there must be a valid cause or basis for suspecting that two or more people have banded together to commit a crime or carry out an illegal act.
Second is that if there is anything that is said or done or written by any one of the conspirators regarding their common intention then it will act as evidence against the others too especially when it is said, done or written after when such intention was formed by any one of them.
CASE LAWS
CASE OF PARVEEN V. STATE OF HARYANA (2021) SC
The short facts regarding this case are as follows: In this court, there are four accused who were guarded by the police so that they could be taken from Central Jail in Jaipur to the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court by train located in Bhiwani. When they reached the Railway Station Naangal Pathani suddenly four young boys entered the compartment in the train that they were in and tried to attack the policemen and as well as tried to rescue the accused also. The accused not only tried to escape but also attempted to snatch the firearm that the police were holding. On top of it was also claimed that one of the accused had fired upon the Head Constable who got injured and later passed away due to this injury. Out of the four one of the people was arrested but the other three ran away. The accused was charged under Sections 224,225,332,353,392,307,302,120-B of the Indian Penal Code in addition to some offences under The Arms Act. The Sessions Court held the accused guilty and when an appeal was made to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana it also sentenced the accused for his wrongdoings. But still, the appellant was not convinced and appealed to The Supreme Court of India further. In its judgement, The Supreme Court of India stated that it is not considered to be safe to hold a person guilty (liable) without any evidence under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code to show that the conspirators had an object in their mind to commit an illegal act. The court had ordered to release of the appellant as even the co-accused was absent to act as evidence.
CASE OF KEHAR SINGH AND OTHRS V. STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION) 1988 SC
The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark judgment, has provided a detailed analysis of what constitutes a conspiracy. The court ruled that the most necessary component for a crime to be classified as a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to carry out an illegal act. This agreement need not be in writing, but it must be established by evidence, which can be direct or circumstantial. The agreement need not be verbal or formal, the court said further. It can be evident even from the actions of the parties involved. The court also clarified that the illegal act need not be committed for the agreement to be considered a conspiracy. The mere existence of the agreement to commit an illegal act is enough to constitute an offence and is punishable under the law. The judgment highlights the importance of the principle of collective criminal responsibility, where all individuals involved in a conspiracy are held liable for the offence committed by any one of them. This principle aims to deter people from engaging in such unlawful activities and promotes the maintenance of law and order in society. In a particular case, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that the crucial factor for an offence to be considered as a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act. The mere existence of such an agreement is considered to be an offence and is punishable by law.
CASE OF MAJOR E.M. BARSAY V. THE STATE OF BOMBAY (1962) SC
The Indian Penal Code addresses the crime of criminal conspiracy under Section 120A. This provision states that it is a criminal crime when two or more people conspire to perform an unlawful act. Even in the absence of any overt actions taken to promote the agreement, the violation is nonetheless criminal. The agreement itself is considered evidence of the conspiracy. The section further clarifies that the agreement need not necessarily involve the commission of a single conspiracy. Multiple conspiracies can be committed within a single agreement, and each of them would be considered a separate offence. This means that if two or more persons agree to commit several illegal acts, each of those acts would be considered a separate offence. It is important to note that even if the conspiracy is not completed, the agreement itself is punishable. This is because the law aims to prevent the commission of illegal acts by nipping them in the bud, so to speak. As a result, the penalty for criminal conspiracy is often the same as the penalty for the most serious crime that the conspiracy was intended to cover up.
CASE OF RAM NARAIN POPLL V. C.B.I (2003) SC
As per the ruling of the Supreme Court of India, it has been clarified that any form of evidence, no matter how small, that establishes an agreement between two or more individuals to engage in an illegal act or to execute an act through illegal means, is enough to convict those involved of the offence of Criminal Conspiracy under Section 120B. This means that if there is even a mere indication of such an agreement, the parties involved are liable to be punished under the law. Therefore, it is essential to refrain from engaging in any such activities, as even a small proof of such an agreement can lead to severe legal consequences.
CASE OF TOPANDAS V. STATE OF BOMBAY (1955) SC
In this specific instance, the appellant was accused of conspiring to use duplicate papers in violation of Section 120B, Section 471, and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted all the accused, but when an appeal was made to the High Court, the judgment was reversed, and they were found guilty of criminal conspiracy as well as substantive offence. This means that the accused not only planned the crime but also executed it. The case was then taken to the Supreme Court of India, which held that it was common sense that a single individual cannot be held guilty of a crime, such as a conspiracy, as they alone cannot commit the offence. Therefore, it was necessary to prove that the appellant had planned to commit the crime with the co-accused or a third party who had not yet been tried in this case. Furthermore, the Supreme Court also noted that the appellant cannot be held guilty under Section 120B if his alleged partners were found not guilty of it. Hence, it was essential to establish that the appellant had planned and conspired with the other accused parties, or someone not yet tried in this case, to commit the crime in question. In conclusion, the Supreme Court of India laid down a clear and short guideline for determining criminal liability in cases of conspiracy and substantive offence. This guideline requires that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had planned and executed the crime in question with the co-accused or a third party who was not yet tried in the case. In this specific instance, the appellant was accused of conspiring to use duplicate papers in violation of Section 120B, Section 471, and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted all the accused, but when an appeal was made to the High Court, the judgment was reversed, and they were found guilty of criminal conspiracy as well as substantive offence (a criminal offence that has been not only planned but also executed). The case was then taken to the Supreme Court of India, which held that it was commonsensical that a single person cannot be held guilty of a crime, as they alone cannot commit the offence of conspiracy. It was added that the appellant cannot be held guilty under Section 120B if his alleged partners were found not guilty of it. It should be proved that he has planned to commit the crime with the co-accused or a third party who has not yet been tried in this case.
CASE OF LEO ROY FREY V. SUPPDT. DISTT. JAIL (1958) SC
The Supreme Court of India has provided a crucial clarification on the concept of ‘conspiracy to commit a crime’. The court’s decision states that planning to commit a crime and committing the crime are two different things. In other words, the planning and preparation involved in a conspiracy takes place before the crime is even attempted, let alone completed. This decision is noteworthy because it emphasizes how crucial it is to recognize conspiracies and prosecute them as distinct crimes. It also helps to ensure that all individuals involved in a criminal act – from those who planned it to those who carried it out – are held accountable for their actions. By making a clear distinction between the crime and the conspiracy to commit it, the court’s ruling provides a more nuanced understanding of criminal law and helps to ensure that justice is served. The Indian Supreme Court has decided that a criminal plot is different from the actual offence. Before the crime is attempted or finished, the plan to do it is made.
CONCLUSION
An example of an inchoate crime is criminal conspiracy, which is when two or more people agree to jointly perform an illegal act. It is crucial to remember that the agreement constitutes a crime in and of itself; the unlawful conduct itself need not be carried out for it to be regarded as such. Conspiracy is often viewed as a joint agency or partnership between individuals who agree to work together to achieve a common goal. In the case of Criminal Conspiracy, that goal is the commission of an illegal act. The superior courts must ensure that this provision is not being misused. While Criminal Conspiracy is a serious offence, it is also important to uphold the rule of law and protect individuals from being falsely accused or convicted. Therefore, the courts must carefully examine all evidence presented in a case of Criminal Conspiracy to ensure that the charges are based on a genuine agreement between the accused parties to commit an illegal act. For more information get in touch with criminal advocates in bangalore