- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
UI created multiple Outlook accounts for someone . Later a guy told me that the guy I made accounts for will use them for carding . I have stopped all contact and won’t do it again. The accounts may have been created from my IP. What legal risk could exist for someone who only created the accounts but did not participate in this? Bcz Carding is illegal in India .
-
-
-
-
-
UCreating accounts is a separate act from carding, and courts do actually look at whether you had knowledge of and agreed to the criminal purpose before treating someone as a conspirator.
The key legal risk here is Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which requires that you were a party to a conspiracy to commit a crime. [1] For a conspiracy charge to stick, there has to be evidence of a shared common design, not just that you did something that later got misused by someone else.
In *K.T. Srinivas v. Inspector of Police, CBI* (2025, Karnataka High Court), the accused was an authorized signatory who operated an account as per authorization, and co-accused had already been convicted of the underlying fraud. The court found that mere association with the scheme, without actual evidence of a conspiracy involving the accused, was not enough. The trial court’s conclusion that there was a conspiracy was based on presumption rather than evidence, and the court acquitted accused no. 3 on that basis. [2] Your situation has a parallel here: you created accounts at someone’s request but did not participate in the carding itself, and you stopped all contact when you learned the intent. The prosecution would need to prove you knew about the criminal purpose at the time you created the accounts, not just that the accounts were later used for something illegal.
The fact that your IP may be linked to the accounts is something police could look at during an investigation, but IP association alone does not establish the mental element (knowing participation in a conspiracy) that Section 120B requires.
If you are contacted by police, do not give a statement without a lawyer present, and document when exactly you learned what these accounts were for and when you cut contact.
Keep any chat records, emails, or messages that show when you first learned about the carding intent and that you immediately stopped.
—
[1] [The Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B: Punishment of criminal conspiracy](https://cassie.in/laws/The_Indian_Penal_Code%2C_1860/120B) — Makes being a party to a criminal conspiracy punishable, requiring proof of shared common design to commit an offence
[2] [K.T. Srinivas v. Inspector of Police, CBI (2025, Karnataka High Court)](https://cassie.in/research/judgment/1180691) — Court acquitted accused who was an authorized signatory of co-accused, finding no evidence of conspiracy beyond presumption; conviction under Section 120B IPC set aside
-
