You are on page 1of 11

MIRZA AKBAR V.

EMPEROR (1941) 43 BOMLR 20

when two or more persons agree to commit a n y c r i m e , t h e y a r e g u i lt y o f c o n s p i ra c y whether the crime was committed or not.
ACCORDING TO STEPHEN, Presentation BY Moola Ram Roll No.-72

Meaning of conspiracy:-

The term conspiracy means a secret plan by a group


to do something unlawful and harmful or something which is not unlawful but by unlawful means.

FACTS OF THE CASE


The appellant was charged with conspiracy to

murder, in consequence of which conspiracy murder was committed under the joint effect of section 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was having an illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased. They entered into a plan to kill the deceased. For this, they hired a person who killed the husband (deceased) and the accused requested the wife to arrange for some money.

CONTI.
The person was arrested on the spot with a loaded gun.

After the murder, both the wife and accused were

arrested. Three love letters which were exchanged between the accused/appellant and the wife of the deceased were produced. The wife made confessional statements against the accused and the person who shot the deceased. Based on the evidences produced three of them were convicted. For this reason, the appeal.

ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT


WHETHER THE LOVE LETTER PRODUCED IS

REVELENT UNDER SECTION 10 OF INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872?


WHETHER THE STATEMENT MADE BY WIFE

BEFORE THE RELEVENT?

JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE

IS

Argument on behalf of then appellant


It was contended on behalf of the appellant that the

Court was not legally constituted, because the appeal to the Court was dismissed and the sentence confirmed by a single Judge of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner sitting alone. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the love letters are not relevant and is not connected with the fact in issue. Also they are not covered under section 10 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Argument on behalf of the prosecution


The love letters are written in reference to the

common intention of conspiracy to commit the murder of the husband (deceased).


This fact however was relied upon by the prosecution

as showing that he was hired assassin, bribed to commit the murder by the appellant and Miss. Mehr Taja who was co-conspirators in that regard.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT


The Privy Council is of the opinion that the love

letters are relevant as they show the arrangement of person and money in furtherance of common intention and design to commit the murder and thus relevant under section 10 of Indian Evidence Act. Furthermore it was held that the confessional statement is not relevant as a conspiracy starts with a plan and after the plan ends neither of parties continue to act as agent of a common plan/design.

CONTI..
Nothing done or said after the execution of the

common design is relevant under section 10 of Indian Evidence Act. After the arrest the agency is over and also with the execution of the design. Statements are relevant when the conspiracy is in foot/when it is active. Thus the three love letters produced in the court are relevant under Sec. 10 of IEA but the statement made by the wife is not relevant under this section

Own Opinion
The Privy Council has rightly adjudged that the

statement made by the wife is not relevant as Common intention envisaged under section 10 of Indian Evidence Act refers to anything said, done or written by conspirator during pendency of conspiracy. The statement made by one conspirator against another is not relevant if made after termination of conspiracy. The evidence of a conspiracy is admissible against his coconspirator on the principle that the thing done, written or spoken was something done in carrying out the conspiracy and was receivable as a step in the proof of the conspiracy.

THANK YOU !!!