Sunday, 27 September 2020

Whether court can hold a person guilty for criminal conspiracy if supplies Sim Card to other accused?

  The role of the appellant

mentioned by the prosecution is that the

appellant facilitated procurement of SIM

card on the request made by accused-Ashok

Jatav. This sim card, it is stated, was

allegedly used by accused Ashok Jatav and

his colleagues in the commission of

offence of kidnapping. Hence, the

appellant was a member of the conspiracy

to commit the offence of kidnapping.

5. 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. Learned counsel for the

appellant, in this regard has highlighted

that there is 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.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 630 OF 2020

MOHAN  Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 

Dated: SEPTEMBER 24, 2020

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for

the parties.

3. The order impugned in this appeal

is one of rejecting the prayer for

suspension of sentence/grant of bail

during the pendency of the appeal against

conviction qua the appellant (Mohan).

4. The role of the appellant

mentioned by the prosecution is that the

appellant facilitated procurement of SIM

card on the request made by accused-Ashok

Jatav. This sim card, it is stated, was

allegedly used by accused Ashok Jatav and

his colleagues in the commission of

offence of kidnapping. Hence, the

appellant was a member of the conspiracy

to commit the offence of kidnapping.

5. 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. Learned counsel for the

appellant, in this regard has highlighted

that there is 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.

6. Taking over all view of the

matter, during the pendency of the

criminal appeal No.2468/2019 pending

before High Court of Madhya Pradesh

(Gwalior Bench), we direct release of the

appellant on bail in connection with

Sessions Trial No.41 of 2008 arising out

of F.I.R. No.32/2008 dated 30.01.2008,

P.S. Vishva Vidhyalaya, District Gwalior

on such terms and conditions as may be

determined by the trial Court.

7. Needless to mention that no

observation made in this order be taken

into account while considering the appeal

before the High Court.

8. The appeal is disposed of in the

4

above terms.

..................,J.

(A.M. KHANWILKAR)

..................,J.

(SANJIV KHANNA)

NEW DELHI

SEPTEMBER 24, 2020


Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment