IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that mere suspicion is insufficient to establish criminal conspiracy; a meeting of minds is essential for charges to be framed.

ORDER :

The challenge in this Criminal Revision Petition is to the order dated 07.09.2019 in Crl.MP No.4761/2016 in S.C No.331/2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Court-II, Alappuzha. The revision petitioner is the defacto complainant.

2. The facts leading to the submission of the final report in S.C No.331/2015 are as follows:

3. On 08.03.2011 at midnight, the revision petitioner and two other charge witnesses were travelling on a motorbike. The accused, nine in number, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, restrained the defacto complainant and the two others and attacked them with a knife, iron rod, etc., The accused attempted to commit murder.

4. In the FIR, Sri.Shinu.J.Pillai, accused No.9 in the final report was cited as accused No.1. The defacto complainant stated in the FIS that the accused persons in the leadership of accused No.9 committed the abovesaid acts. Charge Witness Nos.1 to 3 were the injured. They stated to the Police that accused No.9 was in the scene of occurrence and he directly participated in the commission of the offence.

5. The Investigating Officer, after the investigation, concluded that accused No.9 had no direct involvement in the overt acts alleged. The investigation concluded that he conspired with accused No.1 to commit the overt acts. Therefore, accused No.9 was included in the final report with the aid of the conspiracy theory. In the final report, accused Nos.1 to 10 are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 120-B of IPC.

6. Accused No.9 approached this Court seeking to quash the final report as against him filing Crl.M.C No.5513/2013. This Court, as per order dated 27.08.2014, disallowed his request, but permitted him to approach the Trial Court seeking discharge.

7. Accused No.9 filed Crl.M.P No.4761/2016 seeking discharge under Section 227 Cr.PC. The Trial Court allowed the application and discharged accused No.9 under Section 227 Cr.PC.

8. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.1/accused No.9 and respondent No.3 and the learned Public Prosecutor.

9. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the prosecution has placed sufficient material to establish the involvement of accused No.9 to sustain the charges levelled. The learned counsel submitted that the statements given by CWs 1 to 3 under Section 161 Cr.PC clearly reveal that accused No.9 actually participated in the commission of the offence at the scene of occurrence. The learned counsel further submitted that the material placed by the prosecution has established the element of conspiracy as alleged by the prosecution.

10. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.1/accused No.9 submitted that apart from the statements of CWs 9 to 11 to the effect that accused No.9 had been living in inimical terms with the victims, there is no other material to implicate him as an accused.

11. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that though there is a reference to some conversations between accused No.1 and the holder of the mobile phone with SIM No.9846158885, there is nothing to show that the relevant phone was in possession of accused No.9. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the prosecution had not produced any material relating to the call details to establish the conversation allegedly made between accused No.1 and the person in possession of the other mobile phone on 05.03.2011.

12. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that conspiracy is a matter to be proved during trial. It is further submitted that there cannot be any direct evidence to establish conspiracy, and the prosecution could establish only the circumstances that may point to the involvement of an accused who has been booked under the theory of conspiracy.

13. The Trial Court found that the only allegation against accused No.9 in the final report is that he had conspired with accused