CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY UNDER SECTION 120-A AND 120-B OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
120-A. Definition of criminal conspiracy.- When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done-
(1). an illegal act, or
(2). an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy:
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 the illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.
120-A. Definition of criminal conspiracy.- When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done-
(1). an illegal act, or
(2). an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy:
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 the illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.
Comment
Ingredients of Criminal Conspiracy.- The ingredients of the offence of criminal conspiracy are (1). there must be an agreement between the persons who are alleged to conspire; (2). that the agreement should be (a). for doing an illegal act, or (b). for doing by illegal means an act which may not itself be illegal; and (3). in the case of a conspiracy other than a conspiracy to commit an offence there must be an overt act done by one or more of the parties to the conspiracy to effect the object thereof. A distinction is drawn between an agreement to commit an offence and an agreement of which either the object or the methods employed are illegal but do not constitute an offence. In the case of the former, the criminal conspiracy is completed by the act done by one or more of the parties to the agreement to effect the object thereof, that is, there must be an overt act. Criminal Consppracy as defined in Section. 120-A of the Indian Penal Code is an agreement by two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act or an act wwhich is not illegal by illegal means. The agreement is the gist of the offence. In orderto constitute a single general conspiracy there must be a common design. Each conspirator plays his separate part in one integrated and united effort to achieve the common purpose. Each one is aware that he has a part to play in a general conspiracy though he may not know all its secrets or the means by which the common purpose is to be accomplished. The evil scheme may be promoted by a few, some may drop out and some may join at a later stage, but the conspiracy continues until it is broken up. The conspiracy may develop in successive stages. There may be a general plan to accomplish the common design by such means as may from time to time be found expedient. New techniques may be invented and new means may be devised for advancement of the common plan. A general conspiracy must be distinguished from a number of separate conspiracies having a similar general purpose. Where different groups of persons cooperate towards their separate ends without any privity with each other, each combination constitutes a separate conspiracy. The common intention of the conspirators then is to work for the furtherance of the common design of his group only. [Mohd. Husain Umar Kochra, etc. Vs. K.S. Dalipsinghji and another, etc. (1970) I S.C.J. 149]. The gist of the offence defined in Section. 120-A, Indian Penal Code, which is itself punishable as a substantive offence is the very agreement between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means subject however to the proviso that where thhe agreement is not an agreement to commit an offence the agreement does not amount to a conspiracy unless it is followed up by an overt act done by one or more persons in pursuance of such an agreement. There must be a meeting of minds in the doing of the illegal act by illegal means. If in the furtherance of the conspiracy certain persons are induced to do an unlawful act without the knowledge of the conspiracy or the plot they cannot be held to be conspirators, though they may be guilty of an offence pertaining to the specified unlawful act. The offence of conspiracy is complete, when two or more conspirators have agreed to do or cause to be done an act which is itself an offence, in which case no overt act need be established. It is also clear that an agreement to do an illegal act which amounts to a conspiracy will continue as long as the members of the conspiracy remain in agreement and as long as they are acting in accord and in furtherance of the object for which they entered into the agreement.[Lenart Schussler Vs. The Director of Enforcement, New Delhi, 1971 1 S.C.J. 199].
Illustration.- Where on the allegations in the complaint A-2 asked A-1 to help him in acquiring foreign exchange abroad legally and A-1 agreed to help him, the agreement though initially may not have been an offence was nonetheless an offence subsequently. A-1 did not withdraw from it and was said to have continued to carry out that agreement. A-1's help was necessary for A-2's design. It would, therefore, appear that on the allegations contained in the complaint A-1 and A-2 could be charged with an offence under Secton. 120-B read with Sections. 4(3), 5(1)(e) and 9 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.
In Yash Pal Mittal Vs. The State of Punjab, 1978 Criminal Law Journal. 189 AIR 1977 SC 2433, their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed that the offence of criminal conspiracy under Section. 120-A is a distinct offence introduced for the first time in 1913 in Chapter. V-A of the Indian Penal Code. The very agreement, concert or league is the ingredient of the offence. It is not necessary that all the conspirators must know each and every detail of the conspiracy. There may be so many devices and techniques adopted to achieve the common goal of the conspiracy and there may be division of performances in the chain of actions with one object to achieve the common goal of the conspiracy and there may be division of performances in the chain of actions with one object to achieve the real end of which every collaborator must be interested. There must be unity of object or purpose but there may be plurality of means sometimes even unknown to one another, amongst the conspirators. In achieving the goal several offences may be committed by some of the conspirators even unknown to the others. The only relevant factor is that all means adopted and illegal acts done must be purported to be in furtherance of the object of the conspiracy even though there may be sometimes misfire or overshooting by some of the conspirators. Even if some steps are resorted to by one or two of the conspirators without the knowledge of the others it will not affect the culpability of those others when they are associated with the object of the conspiracy. The significance of criminal conspiracy under Section. 120-A is brought out pithily by the Supreme Court in E.G. Barsay Vs. The State of Bombay, AIR 1961, SC 1962, 1778, thus: "The gist of the offence is an agreement to break the law. The parties to such an agreement will be guilty of criminal conspiracy, though the illegal act agreed to be done has not been done. So too, it is not an ingredient of the offence that all the parties should agree to do do a single illegal act. It may comprise the commission of a number of acts. Under Section. 43 of the Indian Penal Code, an act would be illegal if it is an offence or if it is prohibited by law. Under the first charge the accused are charged with having conspired to do three categories of illegal acts, and the mere fact that all of them could not be convicted separately in respec of each of the offences has no relevancy in considering the question where the offence of conspiracy to do illegal acts though for individual offences all of them may not be liable."
Conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act or to do an unlawful act by unlawful means. So long as a design rests in the intention only, it is not indictable. [Mulcahy Vs. Queen 1868 L.R. 4 H.L. 306, 317].
In Yash Pal Mittal Vs. The State of Punjab, 1978 Criminal Law Journal. 189 AIR 1977 SC 2433, their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed that the offence of criminal conspiracy under Section. 120-A is a distinct offence introduced for the first time in 1913 in Chapter. V-A of the Indian Penal Code. The very agreement, concert or league is the ingredient of the offence. It is not necessary that all the conspirators must know each and every detail of the conspiracy. There may be so many devices and techniques adopted to achieve the common goal of the conspiracy and there may be division of performances in the chain of actions with one object to achieve the common goal of the conspiracy and there may be division of performances in the chain of actions with one object to achieve the real end of which every collaborator must be interested. There must be unity of object or purpose but there may be plurality of means sometimes even unknown to one another, amongst the conspirators. In achieving the goal several offences may be committed by some of the conspirators even unknown to the others. The only relevant factor is that all means adopted and illegal acts done must be purported to be in furtherance of the object of the conspiracy even though there may be sometimes misfire or overshooting by some of the conspirators. Even if some steps are resorted to by one or two of the conspirators without the knowledge of the others it will not affect the culpability of those others when they are associated with the object of the conspiracy. The significance of criminal conspiracy under Section. 120-A is brought out pithily by the Supreme Court in E.G. Barsay Vs. The State of Bombay, AIR 1961, SC 1962, 1778, thus: "The gist of the offence is an agreement to break the law. The parties to such an agreement will be guilty of criminal conspiracy, though the illegal act agreed to be done has not been done. So too, it is not an ingredient of the offence that all the parties should agree to do do a single illegal act. It may comprise the commission of a number of acts. Under Section. 43 of the Indian Penal Code, an act would be illegal if it is an offence or if it is prohibited by law. Under the first charge the accused are charged with having conspired to do three categories of illegal acts, and the mere fact that all of them could not be convicted separately in respec of each of the offences has no relevancy in considering the question where the offence of conspiracy to do illegal acts though for individual offences all of them may not be liable."
Conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act or to do an unlawful act by unlawful means. So long as a design rests in the intention only, it is not indictable. [Mulcahy Vs. Queen 1868 L.R. 4 H.L. 306, 317].
No comments:
Post a Comment