Criminal Conspiracy

2021 SCMR 873 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 120-ACriminal conspiracyScope and pre-requisites

To constitute a conspiracy meeting of two or more persons for doing an illegal act through illegal means was the primary condition

To ascertain conspiracy it had to be seen and kept in mind by the Court that the evidence, concerning each and every circumstance, must clearly be established by reliable evidence; there should be a prima facie evidence affording a reasonable ground for the Court to believe that two or more persons were members of the conspiracy and conspiracy consisted not merely in the intention of two or more persons but in an agreement of two or more persons to do an unlawful act.

2021 SCMR 873 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 120-A & 120-BQanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 23Criminal conspiracy

Essential elements and proof.

2021 SCMR 873 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 120-A & 120-BQanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 23Criminal conspiracy

Principles relating to essential ingredients, scope and proof of criminal conspiracy stated.

2021 YLR 1777 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 302(b), 365-A, 368, 201, 120-A, 109 & 34Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7

Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abduction for ransom, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement, causing disappearance of evidence of offence, abetment, common intention, act of terrorism

Appreciation of evidence

Sentence, reduction in

Criminal conspiracy

Scope

Accused were charged for kidnapping the husband of complainant for ransom through a pre-planned conspiracy, however, when the ransom demands were not met the abductee was murdered by the accused with video recording of his execution

Record showed that there was no evidence that any of the accused were present and that any conspiracy/ plan was made to abduct deceased

No evidence was found to prove that either accused or any other accused hatched a conspiracy to kidnap the deceased for ransom in room of the Hotel within the meaning of S. 120-A, P.P.C. and thus all the accused were acquitted of the charge

Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against all the accused persons except one accused

Appeals were allowed and all the co-accused persons were acquitted of all charges except said accused who was only convicted under S.362, P.P.C. and as such sentenced was to seven years, in circumstances.

2017 PLD 64 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 120-B, 124-A & 505Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.196 & 196-A, 249-A & 265-KConstitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionQuashment of FIRProsecution for offences against the StateSeditionCriminal conspiracyStatements conducing to public mischiefScope and nature of Ss.196 & 196-A, Cr.P.C.

Petitioner sought quashment of FIR registered against him on the ground, inter alia, that cognizance for offences under Ss.120-B, 124-A & 505 of the P.P.C. could only be taken upon a complaint made by or under the authority of a Federal or Provincial Government or some other officer empowered in such behalf, which was not done in the present case

Effect

Legislature had used negative language in Ss.196 & 196-A of the Cr.P.C., hence no court could initiate the process against the accused and in the present case, FIR was registered by the Station House Officer, on his own and competent authority under law had not initiated said process

No sanction was obtained in the present FIR for offences under Ss.124-A, 120-B & 505 P.P.C. and the FIR was registered without approval of competent authority as referred in S.196-A of the Cr.P.C.

High Court observed that while under the law, FIR could not be quashed when alternate course of action was available under S.249-A or 265-K of the Cr.P.C., however it was also the fundamental duty of the court to protect a citizen from abuse of process of law, and from plain reading of FIR in the present case, no offence had been made out nor any legal process was adopted

FIR against the petitioner / accused was declared to be illegal and quashed

Constitutional petition was allowed, accordingly.

2017 PLD 64 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss.120-B, 124-A & 505Offences against the StateSeditionCriminal conspiracyStatements conducing to public mischiefCognizance of offences under Ss.120-B, 124-A & 505 P.P.C.

Essential principles governing cognizance of offences under Ss.120-B, 124-A & 505, P.P.C., explained.

2012 YLR 1502 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 120-ACriminal conspiracyScope

Criminal conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more persons, but in an agreement of two or more persons to do an unlawful act.

2011 PCrLJ 232 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 120Criminal conspiracyMeaningIngredients

Most important ingredient of the offence of conspiracy was the agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act

Conspiracy consisted not merely in the intention of two or more bat in agreement of two or more to do an unlawful or to do a lawful act by unlawful means.

1957 PLD 92 PRIVY-COUNCIL Judicial Precedent

Criminal ConspiracyBetween husband and wife only Whether indictable under law of Tanganyika (East Africa)Rule of English Law

[Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 120-A-Evidence Act (I of 1872). S. 122].