Section 10 of Indian Evidence Act Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design.

10. 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 be 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.

Illustration

Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joined in a conspiracy to wage war against the [Government of India].

The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C collected money in Calcutta for a like object, D persuaded persons to join the conspiracy in Bombay, E published writings advocating the object in view at Agra, and F transmitted from Delhi to G at Kabul the money which C had collected at Calcutta, and the contents of a letter written by H giving an account of the conspiracy, are each relevant, both to prove the existence of the conspiracy, and to prove A's complicity in it, although he may have been ignorant of all of them, and although the persons by whom they were done were strangers to him, and although they may have taken place before he joined the conspiracy or after he left it.

► Ingredients of.—Section 10 provides unique and special rule of evidence to be followed in case of conspiracy. Once conditions given therein are fulfilled, statement made by one conspirator will be taken as evidence against all other co-conspirators, Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 13 SCC 1. ► Accused appearing as witness for defence.—An accused cannot be compelled to give evidence as a prosecution witness in view of the expression “in disproof of the charges” in Section 342-A, CrPC, 1898. But once his evidence as a witness for defence is on record, under Section 10 of the Evidence Act, evidence, as to communications between one conspirator and the other during the time that the conspiracy is going on and relating to implementing that conspiracy, is relevant evidence. The statements by one accused to another and the evidence as to the acts done by him disclosing participation by the other accused in the conspiracy are also relevant, Tribhuvan Nath v. State of Maharashtra, (1972) 3 SCC 511 : 1972 SCC (Cri) 604. ► Relevant time.—Statement made by conspirators after they are arrested are not admissible, because by that time conspiracy would have ended, State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1715.