Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Supreme Court in the matter of Sajeev v. State of Kerala, has laid down the essential constituents for proving a case of criminal conspiracy.

What is the Background of Sajeev v. State of Kerala Case?

• On 04^th April 2003, A1, A3, A10, and A11 hatched a conspiracy to mix methyl alcohol with spirit to sell the same for an unlawful gain through the outlet operated by A1.
• In furtherance of this conspiracy, A10 and A11 brought 21 cans containing methyl alcohol labeled as Biosole in the Maruti car owned by A10 to the residence of A1 and A3.
• Thereafter, A2, A7, and A8 brought spirit to the residence of A1 and A3 in the Ambassador car owned by A2. Methyl Alcohol supplied by A10 and A11 was mixed with this spirit by A1 and A3 and sold through A1's outlet. A4, A5, A6, A9 and A12 assisted A1 in this sale.
• This conspiracy result in the death of 7 innocent people including A4 and A12, blindness in 11 people, and more than 40 people sustaining injuries.
• The Trial Court convicted the accused persons under Section 302, Section 307, Section 326 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
• Thereafter, the High Court of Kerala confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court against these accused persons.
• So, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court.
• The Supreme Court upheld the judgement of the High Court of Kerala.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Abhay S. Oka observed that where in pursuance of the agreement, the conspirators commit offences individually, all of them will be liable for such offences even if some of them have not actively participated in the commission of those offences.
• The Court referred to the landmark case of State through Superintendent of Police v. Nalini & Ors. (1999) in which the Supreme Court summarized the ingredients for constituting a criminal conspiracy which are as follows:
  • Conspiracy is when two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act or legal act by illegal means.
  • The offence of criminal conspiracy is an exception to the general law, where intent alone does not constitute crime. It is the intention to commit a crime and join hands with persons having the same intention.
  • Conspiracy is hatched in private or in secrecy. It is rarely possible to establish a conspiracy by direct evidence. Usually, the existence of the conspiracy and its objects have to be inferred from the circumstances and the conduct of the accused.
  • Where in pursuance of the agreement, the conspirators commit offenses individually or adopt illegal means to do a legal act that has a nexus to the object of the conspiracy, all of them will be liable for such offences even if some of them have not actively participated in the commission of those offences.

What is Criminal Conspiracy?

About:

• Section 120A defines criminal conspiracy. It states that-
  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.
• Section 120B deals with the punishment of criminal conspiracy. It states that-
  (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.

Case Laws:

• In Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra (2013), the Supreme Court restated that to establish conspiracy, it is necessary to establish an agreement between the parties.
• In Mohd. Naushad v. State of NCT of Delhi (2023), the Supreme Court clarified the offense of criminal conspiracy is of joint responsibility, all conspirators are liable for the acts of each of the crimes which have been committed as a result of the conspiracy.