You can only be punished for conspiracy if the planned crime actually happens.

Courts have held that the agreement itself is the offence; if the plan was to commit a crime, the conspiracy is complete once the agreement is made, even if the crime is never carried out.

There must be a written or spoken 'agreement' document to prove conspiracy.

Courts have accepted that conspiracy is usually proved through circumstantial evidence and conduct, since such agreements are typically made in secret (simplified).

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 120A

repealed

Definition of criminal conspiracy

When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done: an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy; Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.§

Why this exists

Before 1913, Indian criminal law mainly punished people who actually committed or attempted crimes, or who helped (abetted) someone else commit one. There was no clear law for punishing people who simply agreed together to commit a crime, even if they hadn't yet acted on it. The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1913 added Sections 120A and 120B to the IPC, borrowing from English common law, to close this gap and allow the law to step in at the planning stage of group crime, not just after harm was done.

How courts read it

Indian courts, including the Supreme Court in cases like State of Tamil Nadu v. Nalini (the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case) and Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Administration), have held that the essence of criminal conspiracy is the 'meeting of minds' to commit an unlawful act — the agreement itself, not the final crime, is the offence. Because such agreements are usually made secretly, courts have accepted that conspiracy can be proved through circumstantial evidence and conduct of the accused, not just direct proof of a spoken or written agreement. Courts have also clarified that the proviso's requirement of an 'overt act' applies only when the object of the agreement is not itself an offence; if the agreement is to commit an offence, the agreement alone is punishable.

Common misconceptions

Myth: You can only be punished for conspiracy if the planned crime actually happens.
Fact: Courts have held that the agreement itself is the offence; if the plan was to commit a crime, the conspiracy is complete once the agreement is made, even if the crime is never carried out.
Myth: There must be a written or spoken 'agreement' document to prove conspiracy.
Fact: Courts have accepted that conspiracy is usually proved through circumstantial evidence and conduct, since such agreements are typically made in secret (simplified).