0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
339 vizualizări54 pagini
This document discusses various offences against property under the Indian Penal Code such as theft, extortion, criminal misappropriation of property, and criminal breach of trust. It defines the key elements of theft as dishonest intention, movable property, taking property out of someone's possession without consent. Extortion is defined as intentionally putting someone in fear of injury and inducing them to hand over property. Various cases related to theft and extortion are discussed to explain these concepts further. Punishments for different types of theft and extortion under various sections of the Indian Penal Code are also outlined.
Descriere originală:
this project is about the offences against all kinds of property
This document discusses various offences against property under the Indian Penal Code such as theft, extortion, criminal misappropriation of property, and criminal breach of trust. It defines the key elements of theft as dishonest intention, movable property, taking property out of someone's possession without consent. Extortion is defined as intentionally putting someone in fear of injury and inducing them to hand over property. Various cases related to theft and extortion are discussed to explain these concepts further. Punishments for different types of theft and extortion under various sections of the Indian Penal Code are also outlined.
This document discusses various offences against property under the Indian Penal Code such as theft, extortion, criminal misappropriation of property, and criminal breach of trust. It defines the key elements of theft as dishonest intention, movable property, taking property out of someone's possession without consent. Extortion is defined as intentionally putting someone in fear of injury and inducing them to hand over property. Various cases related to theft and extortion are discussed to explain these concepts further. Punishments for different types of theft and extortion under various sections of the Indian Penal Code are also outlined.
common to the offences under this chapter is Dishonestly, which the code describes as the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another but the manner in which dishonestly is exercised differs in different cases. Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss or another person is said to do that thing dishonestly. the offences which effects or harm to the public property is considered as offence against property The basic element common to the offences under this chapter is dishonesty which the code describes as the intention of causing wrongful gain to on e person to wrongful loss to another. A stage is however reached when violations of property rights become so violent, mischievous of fraudulent that the state finds it necessary to step in an utilize the machinery for its criminal law to afford protection to property in a speedy and effective way For this it has divide into 10 heads (a) theft (b)extortion (c)Robbery and dacoity (d)criminal misappropriation of property (e) Criminal breach of trust (f) Receiving stolen property (g) Cheating (h) Fraudulent disposal of property (i)Mischief (j)Criminal trespass. OF THEFT (Section 378-382) Section 378 says that whoever intended to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft. For instance- A finds a ring belonging to Z on a table in the house which Z occupies. Here the ring is in Zs possession, and if a dishonestly removes it, A commits theft. This section defines theft and next section prescribes punishment thereof. In order to constitute the offence of theft, there must exist following ingredients a) The accused must have an intention to taking dishonestly; Note- The word dishonestly means as is used in this section, does not carry its ordinary meaning it is a technical term which has been expressly defined in section 24 of IPC itself. A person can be said to have said to have dishonest intention If, in taking the property, it is his intention to cause gain, by unlawful means of the property to which the persons so gaining is not legally entitles or to cause loss by unlawfully means of property to which the person so losing is legally entitled A person may be the guilty of theft of his own property if he takes it dishonestly from other see ills. (j) and (k). where the accused took a bundle belonging to himself which was in the possession f a police constable and for which the constable was accountable it was held that he constable had special property in it and that therefore the accused was guilty of theft. There is no presumption of law that husband a wife constitute one person in India for the purpose of criminal law b)The subject of the theft must be some moveable property. Explanation- if a person takes anything of another dishonestly in his possession by moving it then only it is theft if it is not attached to the land, if a sale of trees belonging to tree others and not cut down at the time of sale does not constitute theft. But removable of a mans trees blown down by a storm amounts to theft. Taking salt against the will of the government from a swamp which is government property and is guarded by the police is theft Electricity not being moveable property, cannot be the subject of theft under the Indian penal code. But section 39 of the Indian electricity act 1910 brings the act of dishonest abstraction consumption or use of electricity within the meaning of theft as understood in the Indian penal code (c) The said moveable property must be taken out of the possession of any person; Notes-The term must be distinguished from custody. A man is said to .be in possession of a thing when he can deal with it as the owner to the exclusion of others. The property is in his custody when he cannot deal with it as the owner, but merely keeps it for the sake of another as in the case of a servant holding property for his master. To constitute theft the property must have in the possession of someone and the possession of someone and then removed from his possession In a case K.N.MEHARA v. STATE OF RAJSTHAN AIR 195 7 SC 369 and in RAMRATAN V STATE OF BIHAR AIR 1965 SC 926,930, the ingredients of theft have defined. In this case in this case there were two persons K.N.Mehara and M.Z.Philips were employed in Indian air force. Both of them were convicted under s 379 IPC for the theft of an aircraft. Both the accused person were cadets on training in the Indian air force academy at jodhpur. Had been discharged from the academy on the ground of the misconduct. Mehara was a cadet receiving training as a navigator and was due to a flight in a Dakota as part of his training. However on the scheduled day Mehara along with Philips took off not in Dakota but a Harvard HT822 before the prescribed time without authorization and without absenting any of the formalities which were perquisites for an air craft flight . they landed at a place in Pakistan about 100 miles away from the India Pakistan blotted. Both of them were sent back to Delhi and arrested reroute in jodhpur and protected and convicted theft. Thus we can indentify the ingredients of theft as follow (i) dishonestly (ii)movable property (III)out of the possession of any person (iv)without the consent of that person(v) moves that property OF EXTORTION
Section 383-390 of Indian penal code deals with
different types of extortion, where section 383 whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induce the person so put in fear to any person any property to valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits extortion. For instance A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning Z unless Z gives him money. He thus induces Z to give him money. He has committed extortion. Thus we can find the elements of extortion In fear of injury to that person or any other person Dishonestly inducement of person to put in fear To deliever any person ,property, of valuable security Or anything sighned which may be converted into a valuable security In a very famous case JADUNANDAN SINGH AND OTHERS V. EMEMPEROR AIR 1941.PAR. 129. It was decided that what will be the criteria of put in fear of a person? It was decided that to convict a person in extortion it must be proved that the victims were put in fear of injury to themselves or to others. Also decided that mere threat of divine displeasure does not amount to extortion FACT OF THE CASE Narain Dusadh and Sheonand Singh, Were returning after the inspection of some fields when the two petitioners and others assaulted them. The petitionet gave a blow to Narain on the right leg and then other people assaulted Sheonandan. Jadunandan, after this forcibly took the thumb impression of Narain on one piece of blank paper and of Sheonandan on three blank papers. On these findings the two petitioners and two others were convicted for extortion under s 384 of IPC. TANULAL UDHA SINGH V EMPEROR is also relevant example of extortion. In this case it was said the harm threatened or caused to be threatened must be form something illegally done. According to se 43 of Indian penal code illegal means anything which is an offence or which is prohibited by law, or which furnishes ground for civil action. To prevent these kinds of offence in our society Indian penal code section 384 provides punishment whoever commits extortion shall be punish with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both THEFT AND EXTORTION DISTINGUISHED- Extortion is committed bY wrongful obtaining of consent. But In theft the offender takes without the owners consent. The property obtained by extortion is not limited, Immovable property may be the subject of extortion. Whereas in theft only movable property are the subject to theft. In extortion the property is obtained by intentional putting a person in fear of injury to that person or to any other, and thereby dishonestly inducing him to part with his property. Whereas In theft the element of force does not arise PUNISHMENT FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF EXTORTION Section 384 to 389 of Indian penal code awards punishment for extortion it says whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of ether description for a term which may extended to three years, or with fine, or with both More over section 385 says whoever, in order to the committing of extortion, puts any person in fear, or attempts to put any person in feat of any injury shall be punished with imprisonment of either for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both. Scope of this section- if the complete offence for instance fear caused and a consequent delivery of the property is committed then it is punishable under section 384. If only the first part of the offence is committed it is punishable under this section. The extortion defined in section 383 includes putting any person in fear of injury and covers this section which deals with a less serious offence Section 386 putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion- this section says whoever commits extortion by putting any person in fear of death or of grievous hurt to that person or to any person of to any other shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years an shall also be liable to fine. In this section if the fear is caused is that of death or grievous hurt in naturally causes great alarm. The section therefore provides for severe penalty in such cases Section 387, extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. - whoever in order to the committing of extortion puts or attempts to put any person in feat of death or of grievous hurt to that person or to any other shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. However section 386 and sec 387 have the same relation as sec 384 and se 385 the only difference being that in a case of this section and se 386 the injury in fear of which a person is put is death or grievous hurt. Should necessarily be instant. OF ROBBERY
390 of Indian penal code says that in all
robbery there is either theft or extortion. Now the question comes when a theft is robbery? And when extortion is robbery? of the theft or in committing the theft or in carrying away or attempting to causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restrain of feat of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restrain. is said to committed robbery. It means every theft is robbery if in order to committing it In Harish Chandra v. State of U.P the victim boarded into train at Chakarpur railway station the accused and the co- accused along with some other person entered the same compartment. When the train reached Thankpur railway station at about 9:30 pm some of the passengers started getting down from the compartment and there was a great rush. At that time the accused forcibly took away the wrist watch of the victim and when the victim raised an alarm the co-accused jumped out of the compartment. The victim also followed them. And after all the accused were caught and the stuff were also recovered from them. Both of the accused were charged for the robbery. It was argued on behalf of the defense that since the slapping of the victim too place after that watch had been stolen the hurt could not have been said to have been caused in order to commit the theft so as to bring the offence under sec 390 IPC the supreme court rejected the argument The ingredients of this section is-
1) There is attempts to cause a persons
death or hurt or wrongful restrain or fear of instant death or. 2) Of instant hurt or instant wrongful restrain. Robbery is an aggravated form of extortion And every extortion is robbery also when in order to committing it offender at the time of committing it is in the presence of the person put in feat and commits the extortion by putting that person in feat of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restrain to that person or to some other persons to do so putting in fear induces the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted. PUNISHMENT FOR DIFFERENT KINDS OF ROBBERY- Section 392, punishment for robbery- lays down Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with regrous imprisionment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine and if the robbery be committed on the highway between unset and sunrise the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years Section 393, attempt to commit robbery- whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall be also be liable to fine and f the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise the imprisonment may ne extended to fourteen years. An intention to rob coupled with some overt act short of robbery in furtherance of the intent is of paramount importance for convicting a person under section. Attempts for offences under the Indian penal code are punishable under section 511 where no express provision is made for punishment of such attempts. This section expressly provides for punishment for attempts to commit robbery. Section 511 would not apply to it. Robbery stands on a different footing from dacoity in this respect as an attempt at dacoity is punishable as decoity. Section 394 voluntarily causes hurt in committing robbery- this section says if any person in committing f pr in attempting to commit robbery voluntarily causes hurt such person and other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery shall be punished with [imprisonment for life] or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also liable to fine Case referred- Om Praksh v. state of utttarpradesh AIR 1956 ALL 163. It has decided what are the criteria which take a case in an offence of robbery? In this case persons had charged for dacoity, two of them were acquitted, the court said that for the dacoity there must be 5 persons. Of criminal misappropriation of property 403. 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property.--Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. (a) A takes property belonging to Z out of Z's possession in good faith, believing, at the time when he takes it, that the property belongs to himself. A is not guilty of theft; but if A, after discovering his mistake, dishonestly appropriates the property to his own use, he is guilty of an offence under this section (b) A, being on friendly terms with Z, goes into Z's library in Z's absence and takes away a book without Z's express consent. Here, if A was under the impression that he had Z's implied consent to take the book for the purpose of reading it, A has not committed theft. But, if A afterwards sells the book for his own benefit, he is guilty of an offence under this section. ( Explanation 2.-A person who finds property not in the possession of any other person, and such property for the purpose of protecting it for, or of restoring it to, the owner, does not take or misappropriate it dishonestly, and is not guilty of an offence; but he is guilty of the offence above defined, if he appropriates it to his own use, when he knows or has the means of discovering the owner, or before he has used reasonable means to discover and give notice to the owner and has kept the property a reasonable time to enable the owner to claim it What are reasonable means or what is a reasonable time in such a case, is a question of fact. It is not necessary that the finder should know who is the owner of the property, or that any particular person is the owner of it: it is sufficient if, at the time of appropriating it, he does not believe it to be his own property, or in good faith believe that the real owner cannot be found. Illustrations (a) A finds a rupee on the high-road, not knowing to whom the rupee belong, A picks up the rupee. Here A has not committed the offence defined in this section (e) A finds a purse with money, not knowing to whom it belongs; he afterwards discovers that it belongs to Z, and appropriates it to his own use. A is guilty of an offence under this section. 405. Criminal breach of trust.--Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits "criminal breach of trust". 411. Dishonestly receiving stolen property.-- Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both 415. Cheating.--Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat (a) A, by falsely pretending to be in the Civil Service, intentionally deceives Z, and thus dishonestly induces Z to let him have on credit goods for which he does not mean to pay. A cheats. (b) A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that this article was made by a certain celebrated manufacturer, and thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.-- Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.