Ishaan Deepak Joshi, MIT-WPU Faculty of Law
ABSTRACT
In cases where there is a reasonable contention to believe two or more persons to have entered into a conspiracy to commit any act qualifying as an actionable wrong, or as an offense under a prevalent law, then any expression; Verbal, written or implied by either of the parties with regards to their common intention, after either of them has entertained such an intention at first, such an expression would be qualified as a fact relevant against each party who is believed to be a co-conspirator, along with fulfilling the purpose of proving the conspiracy to exist and to determine persons who were party to the same. Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is notorious for having the potential of connecting the innocent with the guilty, and also the persons who have regretted their decisions and genuinely abandoned. How does one determine what behavior can qualify as reason enough to believe a conspiracy to exist, and what is the court’s usage of this controversial section? This research article aims to understand through various case laws the interpretation of Section 10 and determine the necessity of its function
