SC Ruling on Framing Charges and Proving Criminal Conspiracy

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Mar 30, 2020

SC Ruling on Framing Charges and Proving Criminal Conspiracy

In State (NCT of Delhi) v. Shiv Charan Bansal[1], the SC held that while framing charges under Sections 227 or 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a strong suspicion founded on some material is adequate. The veracity and the effect of the evidence are not required to be meticulously judged, nor is any weight required to be attached to the probable defence of the accused at the stage of framing charges.

The SC also held that the offence of conspiracy requires some kind of physical manifestation of the agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act. However, the same need not be proved, nor is it necessary to prove the actual words of communication. It is sufficient if there is a tacit understanding between the conspirators for the execution of the common illegal object.

[1] (2020) 2 SCC 290.

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.