Criminal conspiracy charges require concrete material of agreement or participation; mere association or account opening is not enough.

A charge of criminal conspiracy requires material showing an agreement or nexus between the accused and the other participants; mere association, relationship, or the opening of bank accounts in the petitioner's name was insufficient without bedrock facts showing participation in the unlawful design. The record disclosed no clear link establishing knowledge, agreement, or active role in the alleged siphoning of funds, and the allegations were too slender to create grave suspicion for trial on conspiracy or the connected substantive offences. The charges framed against the petitioner were therefore unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the charges framed against the petitioner under criminal conspiracy and allied offences were sustainable on the materials in the charge sheet.

Analysis: To sustain a charge of criminal conspiracy, there must be material showing an agreement or nexus between the accused and the other participants. Mere association, relationship, or the fact that bank accounts were opened in the petitioner's name was insufficient unless supported by some bedrock facts pointing to participation in the unlawful design. The record showed no clear link establishing the petitioner's knowledge, agreement, or active role in the alleged siphoning of funds. The allegations attributed to her were too slender to raise a grave suspicion warranting trial for conspiracy or the connected substantive offences.

Conclusion: The charges framed against the petitioner were unsustainable and were set aside, resulting in success of the petition.

---