[Section 120B IPC] Conspiracy Cannot Be Assumed From A Set Of Unconnected Facts Or Conduct At Different Places & Times Without A Reasonable Link: SC [Read Order]

Conspiracy cannot be assumed from a set of unconnected facts or from a set of conduct at different places and times without a reasonable link, the Supreme Court observed while releasing an accused on bail.

In this case, the allegation against the accused was that he was involved in the conspiracy to commit the offence of kidnapping. According to the prosecution case, the accused facilitated procurement of SIM card on the request made by another accused, who used it in the commission of offence of kidnapping. The accused was convicted by the Trial Court.  Before the High Court, he filed application seeking suspension of sentence/grant of bail during the pendency of the appeal against conviction. This application was dismissed by the High Court.

In appeal, the accused contended here was no substantial evidence to indicate that the appellant was aware that the sim card would be later on or was likely to be used in the commission of the offence of kidnapping which the appellant has been tried. Addressing this contention, the bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna observed:

"The question would be whether the appellant (Mohan) was a party to the agreement to do or caused to do the illegal act of kidnapping to be a member of the criminal conspiracy. We are aware of the Explanation to Section 120A but in the facts of the present case, the legal effect of the Explanation in the light of the evidence has to be examined. Conspiracy cannot be assumed from a set of unconnected facts or from a set of conduct at different places and times without a reasonable link."

Observing thus, the bench ordered his release on bail on such terms and conditions as may be determined by the trial Court.

Section 120A defines criminal conspiracy. It reads: 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 to this provision clarifies that 'it is immaterial whether the illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.'

Case name: MOHAN vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Case no.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 630 OF 2020 

Coram: Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna

Counsel: AOR Divyesh Pratap Singh, AOR Gopal Jha

Click here to Read/Download Order

Read Order