Section 10 deals with the admissibility of evidence in a conspiracy case. The term conspiracy means combination of toward more persons for unlawful purposes. Conspiracy is the corrupt agreeing together of two or more persons to do, by concerted action, something unlawful either as a means or as an end.
Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code provides definition of criminal conspiracy :- 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.
A conspiracy consists of unlawful combination of two or more persons to do that which is contrary to law, or which is wrongful towards other persons. it may be punishable criminally or civilly by action.
There must be a consent of will and endeavor between the conspirators. The mere knowledge on the part of a man about a conspiracy will not make him a conspirator.
Sec 10 of Indian evidence act deals with things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design —Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to so conspiring, as well for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to it.
The things said, done or written by one person will be admissible against him and others in a conspiracy case only when that thing is said, done or written in reference to the common intention of the Conspiracy. The word intention implies that the act intended is in the future and section 10 of Indian Evidence Act makes relevant statements by a conspirator with reference to the future.
If nothing was said, done or written in the past that is before such intention was entertained by any one of them, it is not relevant and cannot be proved.
Prosecutors commonly charge conspiracy whenever two or more offenders act in tandem. A person can be convicted both of an underlying crime and of conspiracy to commit it, and receive separate punishments for each offense.
In case of State of Gujarat v. Mohd. Atik & ors, It was held by supreme quote that once the common intention seized to exist any statement made by a former conspirator, thereafter could not be regarded as one made in reference to their common intention. In other words the post arrest statement made to the police officer whether it is confession or otherwise touching his involvement in of Indian evidence act.
