TABLE OF CONTENTS: -

S. NO TOPIC Pg. No.

1. INTRODUCTION:- ---------------------------------------------------

2. DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF CONSPIRACY :---------------- 4

3. CONSPIRACY: MEANING--------------------------------------------- 6

4. DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

UNDER SEC. 120A OF IPC 1860.------------------------------------ 7

5. INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 120A , INDIAN PENAL CODE , 7-8

6. NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE LAW OF CRIMINAL

CONSPIRACY IN SECTION 120A, IPC 1860:------------------- 9-10

7. PROOF OF CONSPIRACY:------------------------------------------ 11
8. PROCEDURE:---------------------------------------------------------- 12
9. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY
AS LAID DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:-- 13-15
11. PUNISHMENT OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY :--------------- 15-16
12. EFFECT OF ACQUITAL OF ACCUSED:------------------------ 17

13. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 120B AND SECTION 107 ,

INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860------------------------------------ 18

14. CONCLUSION---------------------------------------------------- 18

15. BIBLILOGRAPHY----------------------------------------------- 19

INTRODUCTION:-

(CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY)

1
 Of the three categories of inchoate offences in common law, conspiracy is one of the most
complicated laws.

As Glanville Williams writes1:

If mere the intention of one person to commit a crime is not criminal, why should the
agreement of two people t do it make it criminal? The only possible reply is that the law is
fearful of numbers, and the act of agreeing to offend is regarded as such a decisive step as to
justify its own criminal sanction.

The scope and nature of conspiracy, and the degree of proof required to establish the same
has constantly evolving in recent years.

In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a

crime at some time in the future

DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF CONSPIRACY :-

Chapter VA was first inserted in the penal code in 1913. Conspiracy, at common law ,had its
origin primarily as a civil wrong, but was lately made punishable as criminal wrong. Conspiracy
was originaly used to explain the acts of the agreement of those who combined to carry legal
proceedings in an improper way.

The house of Lords in the famous case of Mulcahy v. R.2 stated:-

A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more but in the agreement of two or
more to do an unlawful act by an unlawful means, so long as such a design rest in intention only
it is not indictable. When two agree to carry it into effect , the very plot is an act in itself and the
act of each of the parties promise against promise actus contra actum capable of being enforced
it lawful, punishable it for a criminal object or for the use of criminal means.

The position, however, changed with the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1913. It added
ch. VA (ss.120A and 120 B) to IPC 1860.

Thus, with the inclusion o fss. 120A and 120B, IPC norm encompasses the law of conperacy to
cover the following3:-

1
P.S.A. Pillai, criminal law,229,(Lexis Nexis ,Eastern Lucknow,12th edition 2014)
2
(1868) LR 3 HL 306

2
1) conspiracy as a substantive offence( ss.120A and 120B)

2) Conspiracy as a form of abetment ( s. 107)

3) Conspiracy to wage, attempt to or abet ear against the government of India ( s.121A)

4) Involment in specific offences,such as assembling for purpose of committing dacoity.

CONSPIRACY: MEANING4:-

A criminal conspiracy under the English law and also under india law as it now stands, is
the agreement of two or more person to do an illegal acts, to do a legal act by an illegal means. In
other words a joint evil intend is necessary to constitute crimes.

No physical action need take place. No consummation of the crime need be achived of even
attempted.5

As per the oxford dictionary conspiracy means, A secret plan by a group to do something
unlawful or harmful.

It has been also explained by the Honble SC of India in Nalini case:

In state v. Nalini6

Crimianl conspiracy is the agreement of two or more person to do an illegal acts, to do a legal
act by an illegal means. In other words a joint evil intend is necessary to constitute crimes. The
illegal act may or may not have been done in persurance of agreement but the very agreement is
an offence and ia punishable. Every one of the conspirator need not have taken active part in the
commission of the offence.

3
K.D.Gaur,Criminal Law,200( Universal Law Publishing,5 th edition,2014)
4
K.D.Gaur,Criminal Law,201( Universal Law Publishing,5th edition,2014)
5
Law COMMISSION of India,42nd REPORT (1971) P. 126
6
(1999) 5 Supreme 60.

3
Definition of Criminal conspiracy under Sec.120-A of IPC 1860.

When two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done

I) An illegal Act
II) An act which is not illegal but when it is done by illegal means.
Such an agreement is designated/made a criminal conspiracy.

Further provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence, shall amount to
a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to
such agreement in pursuance thereof.

Explanation : It is immaterial whether he illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement or
is merely incidental to that object.

In other words, the conspirator is guilty of criminal conspiracy; whether the illegal act is the
ultimate object of the agreement or it is merely incidental to the object of the agreement. The law
does not treat these cases differently.

Ingredients of section 120(A), INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860,

Main Ingredients of section 120(A) are:

1) There should be two or more persons.

2) There should be an agreement between themselves.

3) Agreement must be to do /cause to be done.

a) an illegal act/legal act by illegal means

b) the proviso of this section amplify the scope of the liability as follows-

In the case of conspiracy to commit an offence, the mere agreement sufficient to impose
liability without requirement that over act in fur thence of conspiracy should have been
committed.

4
 In the case of conspiracy to do a legal act by illegal means there ought to be some over act
which should have been committed by one or more parties to the assignment, apart from the
agreement itself.

The law of criminal conspiracy as outlines in the Penal Code text the following two forms-

1) Where over act is not necessary and an agreement per se is made punishable.

2) Where over act is necessary.

In the former a near agreement to commit an offence amounts to criminal conspiracy. In the
later form, a mere agreement to do or caused to be done an illegal act or a legal act by illegal
means does not amount to criminal conspiracy unless a party to the agreement commits an over
act in pursuance of agreement KTMS vs. Union of India7

In R. Venkatakrishnan v. Central bureau of investigation8 The apex court elaborately discussed

the law relating to conspiracy and its application in particular law.

NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE LAW OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY IN SECTION

120A, IPC 18609:

1) Conspiracy is a substantive offence. The offence of criminal conspiracy exists in the very
agreement between two or more persons to commit a criminal offence10.

2) Agreement is the rock bottom of criminal conspiracy. Its essence is the unlawful
combination.

7
(1992) 3 SCC 178
8
AIR 2010SC 1812
9
P.S.A. Pillai, criminal law,233,(Lexis Nexis ,Eastern Lucknow,12th edition 2014)
10
Bimbadhar Pradhan v. State of Orissa AIR 1956 SC 469.

5
3) To constitute a conspiracy, meeting of minds of two or more persons for doing an illegal act
or a legal act by illegal means is the first and primary condition and it is not necessary that all the
conspirators must know each other and every details of conspiracy.

4) If there are more than two persons involved in a conspiracy and one or some of the other
accused had been acquitted, the remaining accused (even if it is one) could be convicted under
Section 120B of the IPC11.

5) The gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy is to break the law.

6) The essence of the agreement to break the law is the agreement to do an illegal act. By virtue
of Section 43 of the IPC, everything : (i) which is an offence; (ii) which is prohibited by law; and
(iii) which furnishes a ground for civil action is an illegal act.

7) The essentials of a single conspiracy require that there must be a common design and a
common intention of all to work in furtherance of the common design.

8) When an offence is committed by different persons acting in the same manner but
independently, it cannot be said that there was necessarily a conspiracy.

9) It is not necessary for all the conspirators to know each other.

10) Every conspirator is liable for all the acts of the co-conspirators, even if some of them had
not actively participated in the commission of the offence12.

11) When the ultimate offence consists of a chain of actions, it is not necessary for the
prosecution to establish that each of the conspirators had the knowledge of the conspired act.

11
Supra,10
12
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Kishanlal Pradhan AIR 1987 SC 773

6
12) Where the agreement between certain persons is a conspiracy to do or continue to do
something which is illegal, the entire agreement must be viewed as a whole.

13) Conspiracy is a continuing offence and it continues to subsist and committed, if one of the
conspirators does an act or a series of acts now and then.

PROOF OF CONSPIRACY:

1) A conspiracy is always hatched in secrecy. It is a matter of common experience that direct

evidence to prove conspiracy is rarely available. It is therefore impossible to adduce direct
evidence of the same. The offence can only be proved largely from inferences drawn from acts
or illegal omissions committed by the conspirators in pursuance of a common design.

2) Conspiracy is generally a matter of inference to be deduced from special acts or illegal

omissions of the accused done in pursuance of the common intention of the conspirators and the
apparent criminal purpose in common amongst them. There must be some evidence on record
which establishes such a common design.

3) As direct evidence is generally difficult to adduce in cases involving conspiracy charge, the
prosecution generally depend on circumstantial evidence relying on evidence of acts of various
parties to infer that they were done in reference to their common intention.

4) It is not necessary to prove that the perpetrators expressly agreed to do or cause to be done an
illegal act as the agreement could be proved by necessary implication.

7
5) Conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence, as it is the only type of evidence that is
normally available to prove conspiracy.

6) The conditions for assessing the evidence of co-conspirators as laid down in Section 10 of the
Evidence Act, 1872 are:

i) There should be prima facie evidence regarding the involvement of two or more people
in forming an agreement;

ii) Then, anything said, done or written by any one of them in reference to the common
intention will be evidence against the other; and

iii) Anything said, done or written by the conspirator after the common intention was
formed by any of them would be admissible.

PROCEDURE:

As regards procedure if the offence falls under Clause I of Section 120-B, the procedure to be
followed is applicable to that offence which is the object of the conspiracy that is to say, it is
cognizable warrant or summons bailable or non bailable as the offence which is the object of the
conspiracy.

It is not compoundable and is triable by the Court of Session if the offence which is the object of
the conspiracy is triable exclusively by such Court; in the case of all other offences it is triable by
the Court of Session or a Magistrate of the first class. If the offence falls under clause 2, a
warrant or a summons may issue in the first instance. It is bailable and not compoundable and
triable by a Magistrate of the first class.

8
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY AS LAID DOWN BY THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:

In State of Tamil Nadu v. Nalini13 , when the main accused herself has admitted in her
confessional statement that she had played a vital role in conspiracy for murder of Mr. Rajiv
Gandhi and her confession is corroborated by other material and witness evidence, there is no
need of interference in conviction under Sections 300 and 120-B of the IPC. In this case the
Supreme Court framed the following principles governing the law of conspiracy after reviewing
the judicial pronouncement on the law of conspiracy:

1) Offence of criminal conspiracy is committed when two or more persons agree to do or cause
to be done an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means.

2) Not only the intention, there has to be an agreement to carry out the object of the intention,
which is an offence. Only entertaining a wish is not sufficient to convict a person for criminal
conspiracy though it may be an evil wish.

3) Acts subsequent to the achieving of objects of conspiracy may tend to prove that a particular
accused was a party to the conspiracy.

4) As conspiracy is hatched in private or in secrecy, its objects are to be inferred from the
circumstances and from the conduct of the accused.

5) Conspirators may be enrolled one after another in chain. It is not the part of the crime of
conspiracy that all the conspirators need to agree to play the same and active role.

13
AIR 1999 SC 2640
9
6) There has to be two conspirators and there may be more than that. To prove the charge of
conspiracy, it is not necessary that the intended crime was committed or not.

7) It is not necessary that all conspirators should agree to the common purpose at the same time.

8) Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the accused has knowledge
of object of conspiracy, but also the agreement.

9) It is the unlawful agreement and not its accomplishment, which is the gist or essence of the
crime of conspiracy though it is not formal or express.

10) A Criminal Conspiracy is a partnership in crime and that each conspiracy consists of a joint
and mutual agency for a prosecution of a common plan.

11) A man may join a conspiracy by word or deed. One who commits an overt act with
knowledge of the conspiracy and others standing by conspirators are guilty.

12) A conspiracy is not broken into several conspiracies when a new member joins the
conspiracy. It continues from the time of agreement to the time of its termination.

13) In the absence of proof, relatives or spouses providing food or shelter cannot be treated as
members of a criminal conspiracy even though they may have knowledge about such a
conspiracy.

14) In absence of evidence that accused had even knowledge of any conspiracy, the mere
association with the main accused would not make him member of conspiracy because
agreement is a sine qua non of offence of conspiracy.

PUNISHMENT OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY : SECTION 120B, IPC1860,

10
 As per Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (1) whoever is a party to a
criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or
rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is
made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if
he had abetted such offence.

(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an
offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both.

For purposes of punishment, Section 120B divides criminal conspiracies into two classes:

(i) A party of a conspiracy to commit a serious offence is punished in the same manner as if he
had abetted the offence,

(ii) conspiracies to commit any other offence and conspiracies to commit illegal acts other than
offences are subjected to imprisonment for a term upto six months with or without fine or both.

Section 120B of the code is required to read with Section 196 of the code. It mandates a Court
not to, without prior sanction of the State Government or the District Magistrate, take cognisance
of a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment of a term more
than two years.

No prior sanction of the concerned State Government or of the District Magistrate is required
when the criminal conspiracy related to an offence punishable with imprisonment for two or less
than two years imprisonment. For initiating criminal proceedings parties to a conspiracy made

11
abroad, requires sanction of the Central Government. A conspiracy hatched in India to commit
an unlawful act outside India does not require sanction of the Central Government.

RAM NARAIN POPLY CASE14: It was held that a conspiracy is a continuing offence
which continues to subsists til it is executed or rescinded or frustrated by choice of necessity.
During its subsistence whenever any one of the conspirators does an act or series of acts he
would be held guilty under section 120B of the IPC 1860.

EFFECT OF ACQUITAL OF ACCUSED15:-

Another issue in question is that if in a conspiracy case when most co- accused are acquitted of
the charge against them , and after acquittal only one accused remains , then in the absence of
charge that the offence was committed by the named accused persons along with other unnamed
accused person ,the effect of acquittal of all but one accused person will reault in the failure of
prosecution case itself. One person can not be held guilty for the simple reason that one
person can not conspire with oneself.

In BH Narasimha v. government of Andhra Pradesh16 , since the other seven co accused

were acquitted and there was no allegation that there were other unnamed person also involved
in the conspiracy, the accused had to be acquitted.

However in the later recent case of 2009,it has been held, acquittal of sole co-conspirator on
some technical grounds,rather than on facts, or defect in framing charges against co-accused and
there by leaving behind a single person accused of criminal conspiracy, does not warrant
acquittal of the sole.

14
Ram Narain Poply v. C.B.I.,AIR 2003 SC 2748
15
P.S.A. Pillai, criminal law,241,(Lexis Nexis ,Eastern Lucknow,12th edition 2014)
16
AIR 1996 SC 64

12
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 120B AND SECTION 107 ,INDIAN PENAL CODE
1860

One of the important diffrerence between section 107 froviding for the offence of abetment of
conspiracy, and as ss. 120A and 120B,is that while the former is punishable only if some act or
illegal omission in pursuance of that conspiracy has been committed beside the agreement itself,
later section make the agreement itself an offence.

CONCLUSION

In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at
some time in the future.[1]Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require
that at least one overt act must also have been undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to
constitute an offense. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most
countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect (compare
attempts which require proximity to the full offence). For the purposes of concurrence, the actus
reus is a continuing one and parties may join the plot later and incur joint liability and conspiracy
can be charged where the co-conspirators have been acquitted or cannot be traced. Finally,
repentance by one or more parties does not affect liability unless, in some cases, it occurs
before the parties have committed overt acts but may reduce their sentence.

13
14