[Section 120-B, P.P.C.]
Mere association or forming common intention without anything more is sufficient for conviction. (DB) PLD 1966 Dac. 305, M.R. Serang etc.
Illegal act not done: A person may be guilty of criminal conspiracy even though the illegal act, which he has agreed to do, has not been done for the crime of conspiracy consists only in the agreement or confederacy to do an illegal act by legal means or a legal act by illegal means. 42 Cal. 957. Amrit Lal Hazara. (DB) PLD 1966 Dac. 305. Mukhles-ur-Rehman. PLD 1966 Dac. 237. Annanda Charan Dey etc. (FB) PLD 1978 Lah. 523 State v. Z.A. Bhutto.
Overt act in the case of criminal conspiracy consists in the agreement of the parties to do an unlawful act or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. AIR 1927 Cal. 265 = 28 Cr.LJ 241. Nirmal Chander De.
No direct proof: In cases of conspiracy, the agreement between the conspirators cannot generally be directly proved, but only inferred from the established facts in the case. ILR 15 Lah. 84, Punjab Singh v. Emp. PLD 1962 Lah. 939 Tariq Mahmood.
When offence committed: When the matter has gone beyond the stage of mere conspiracy and offences are alleged to have been committed in pursuance thereof section 120-B is wholly irrelevant. Those persons who have committed the offence should be charged with the substantive offence and those who have abetted it by conspiracy should be charged with abetment under section 109, Penal Code. AIR 1938 Mad. 129 = 39 Cr.LJ 261. Venkataramiah.
Abetment of conspiracy. Conspiracy is one of the forms of abetment and it makes no difference that conspiracy by way of abetment requires an overt act, where as conspiracy under section 120-A of P.P.C. to commit the illegal act requires no overt act. Abetment is just as substantive an offence as conspiracy under section 120-A, P.P.C. (DB) PLD 1956 Kar. 395, Jan Mohammad v. Crown.
One Conspirator cannot cheat a co-conspirator in the matter of same conspiracy (DB) PLD 1966 Kar. 183 State v. A.G. Sheikh.