IPC, Kidnappping and Abduction

Kidnapping and Abduction
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Kidnapping 2
3. Abduction 9
4. Difference between kidnapping and abduction 11
5. Aggravated forms of kidnapping and abduction 12
6. Slavery and Forced Labour 32
7. The Immoral Traffic (prevention) Act, 1956 33
8. Statistics 36
9. Conclusion 39
10. Bibliography 40
INDIAN PENAL CODE PROJECT SUBMISSION Page 1

BACKGROUND
Criminal law is a body of rules and statutes that defines conduct prohibited by the
state because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare and that establishes
punishment to be imposed for the commission of such acts. Criminal law differs
from civil law, whose emphasis is more on dispute resolution than in punishment.
The term criminal law generally refers to substantive criminal laws. Substantive
criminal laws define crimes and prescribe punishments. In contrast, Criminal
Procedure describes the process through which the criminal laws are enforced. For
example, the law prohibiting murder is a substantive criminal law. The manner in
which state enforces this substantive law—through the gathering of evidence and
prosecution—is generally considered a procedural matter.
II. History: The first civilizations generally did not distinguish between civil law and
criminal law. The first written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians around
2100-2050 BC. Another important early code was the Code Hammurabi, which
formed the core of Babylonian law. These early legal codes did not separate penal and
civil laws. Of the early criminal laws of Ancient Greece only fragments survive, e.g.
those of Solon and Draco.
After the revival of Roman law in the 12th century, sixth-century Roman
classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction between
criminal and civil law in European law from then until the present time. The first
signs of the modern distinction between crimes and civil matters emerged during the
Norman invasion of England. The special notion of criminal penalty, at least
concerning Europe, arose in Spanish Late Scolasticism, when the theological notion
of God's penalty (poena aeterna) that was inflicted solely for a guilty mind, became
transfused into canon law first and, finally, to secular criminal law. The development
of the state dispensing justice in a court clearly emerged in the eighteenth century
when European countries began maintaining police services. From this point,
criminal law had formalized the mechanisms for enforcement, which allowed for its
development as a discernible entity.
Criminal law governs crimes, including felonies and misdemeanors. Crimes are
generally referred to as offenses against the state. The standard of proof for crimes is
"beyond a reasonable doubt." For information on particular crimes or issues
surrounding the criminal law, please select from one of the topics below.
Criminal law in India means offenses against the state, it includes felonies and
misdemeanors. The standard of proof for crimes is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Criminal law is governed by Indian penal Code, Crpc, evicence Act etc.
A body of rules and statutes that defines conduct prohibited by the government
because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare and that establishes
punishment to be imposed for the commission of such acts.
The term criminal law means crimes that may establish punishments. In contrast,
Criminal Procedure describes the process through which the criminal laws are
enforced. For example, the law prohibiting murder is a substantive criminal law. The
manner in which government enforces this substantive law through the gathering of
evidence and prosecution is generally considered a procedural matter.
Crimes are usually categorized as felonies or misdemeanors based on their nature and
the maximum punishment that can be imposed. A felony involves serious
misconduct that is punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year.
Most state criminal laws subdivide felonies into different classes with varying degrees
of punishment. Crimes that do not amount to felonies are misdemeanors or
violations. A misdemeanor is misconduct for which the law prescribes punishment of
no more than one year in prison. Lesser offenses, such as traffic and parking
infractions, are often called violations and are considered a part of criminal law.
III. Definition Of Crime: Many jurists have defined crime in their own ways some of
which are as under. it is very difficult to give a correct and precise definition of crime,
Glanville Williams, admitted the impossibility of having a workable content
based definition of crime, points out that the definition of crime is one of the sharp
intellectual problem of law.
Likewise Russell also admitted that – to define crime is a task which so far has not
been satisfactorily accomplished by any writer.
Such a difficulty in ultimate analysis arises due to the changing nature of crime, an
outcome of equally dynamic criminal and penal policy of a state.
However some sociologists, perceiving crime as a social phenomenon feel that

criminal law in a sense, protects certain social interests, and any act which threatens
or poses threat to this interests is define as crime.
In general terms crime is defined as an act punishable by law as forbidden by statue
or injurious to the public welfare. It is very wide definition, any thing which is
injurious to public welfare is crime, in modern complex society there are many things
which are injurious or against the public welfare for example selling contaminated
food molestation of young children, etc.
· Blackstone defined crime as an act committed or omitted in violation of a public

law either forbidding or commanding it.
· Stephen observed a crime is a violation of a right considered in reference to the evil
tendency of such violation as regards the community at large.
· Oxford Dictionary defines crime as an act punishable by law as forbidden by statute
or injurious to the public welfare.
IV. Fundamental Elements Of Crime: There are four elements which go to constitute

a crime, these are:-
· Human being
· Mens rea or guilty intention
· Actus reus or illegal act or omission
· Injury to another human being
Human Being- The first element requires that the wrongful act must be committed
by a human being. In ancient times, when criminal law was largely dominated by the
idea of retribution, punishments were inflicted on animals also for the injury caused
by them, for example, a pig was burnt in Paris for having devoured a child, a horse
was killed for having kicked a man. But now, if an animal causes an injury we hold
not the animal liable but its owner liable for such injury.
So the first element of crime is a human being who- must be under the legal
obligation to act in a particular manner and should be a fit subject for awarding
appropriate punishment.
Section 11 of the Indian Penal Code provides that word ‘person’ includes a company
or association or body of persons whether incorporated or not. The word ‘person’
includes artificial or juridical persons.
Mens Rea- The second important essential element of a crime is mens rea or evil
intent or guilty mind. There can be no crime of any nature without mens rea or an
evil mind. Every crime requires a mental element and that is considered as the
fundamental principle of criminal liability. The basic requirement of the principle
mens rea is that the accused must have been aware of those elements in his act which
make the crime with which he is charged.
There is a well known maxim in this regard, i.e. “actus non facit reum nisi mens sit
rea” which means that, the guilty intention and guilty act together constitute a crime.
It comes from the maxim that no person can be punished in a proceeding of criminal
nature unless it can be showed that he had a guilty mind.
Actus Reus [Guilty Act Or Omission] - The third essential element of a crime is actus
reus. In other words, some overt act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance
of the guilty intention. Actus reus is the manifestation of mens rea in the external
world. Prof. Kenny was the first writer to use the term ‘actus reus’. He has defined
the term thus- “such result of human conduct as the law seeks to prevent”.
Injury- The fourth requirement of a crime is injury to another person or to the

society at large. The injury should be illegally caused to any person in body, mind,
reputation or property as according to Section 44 of IPC, 1860 the injury denotes any
harm whatever illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property.
V. Stages Of A Crime If a person commits a crime voluntarily or after preparation
the doing of it involves four different stages. In every crime, there is first intention to
commit it, secondly, preparation to commit it, thirdly, attempt to commit it and
fourthly the accomplishment. The stages can be explained as under-
1. Intention- Intention is the first stage in the commission of an offence and known

as mental stage. Intention is the direction of conduct towards the object chosen upon
considering the motives which suggest the choice. But the law does not take notice of
an intention, mere intention to commit an offence not followed by any act, cannot
constitute an offence. The obvious reason for not prosecuting the accused at this
stage is that it is very difficult for the prosecution to prove the guilty mind of a
person.
2. Preparation- Preparation is the second stage in the commission of a crime. It

means to arrange the necessary measures for the commission of the intended criminal
act. Intention alone or the intention followed by a preparation is not enough to
constitute the crime. Preparation has not been made punishable because in most of
the cases the prosecution has failed to prove that the preparations in the question
were made for the commission of the particular crime.
If A purchases a pistol and keeps the same in his pocket duly loaded in order to kill
his bitter enemy B, but does nothing more. A has not committed any offence as still
he is at the stage of preparation and it will be impossible for the prosecution to prove
that A was carrying the loaded pistol only for the purpose of killing B.
Preparation When Punishable- Generally, preparation to commit any offence is not

punishable but in some exceptional cases preparation is punishable, following are
some examples of such exceptional circumstances-
· Preparation to wage war against the Government - Section 122, IPC 1860;
· Preparation to commit depredation on territories of a power at peace with

Government of India- Section 126, IPC 1860;
· Preparation to commit dacoity- Section 399, IPC 1860;
· Preparation for counterfeiting of coins or Government stamps- Sections 233-235, S.

255 and S. 257;
· Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged documents.

Mere possession of these is a crime and no possessor can plead that he is still at the
stage of preparation- Sections 242, 243, 259, 266 and 474.
3. Attempt- Attempt is the direct movement towards the commission of a crime after

the preparation is made. According to English law, a person may be guilty of an
attempt to commit an offence if he does an act which is more than merely
preparatory to the commission of the offence; and a person will be guilty of
attempting to commit an offence even though the facts are such that the commission
of the offence is impossible. There are three essentials of an attempt:-
· Guilty intention to commit an offence;
· Some act done towards the commission of the offence;
· The act must fall short of the completed offence.
Attempt Under The Indian Penal Code, 1860- The Indian Penal Code has dealt with
attempt in the following four different ways-
· Completed offences and attempts have been dealt with in the same section and
same punishment is prescribed for both. Such provisions are contained in Sections
121, 124, 124-A, 125, 130, 131, 152, 153-A, 161, 162, 163, 165, 196, 198, 200, 213,
240, 241, 251, 385, 387, 389, 391, 394, 395, 397, 459 and 460.
· Secondly, attempts to commit offences and commission of specific offences have

been dealt with separately and separate punishments have been provided for attempt
to commit such offences from those of the offences committed. Examples are-
murder is punished under section 302 and attempt to murder to murder under
section 307; culpable homicide is punished under section 304 and attempt to commit
culpable homicide under section 308; Robbery is punished under section 392 and
attempt to commit robbery under section 393.
· Thirdly, attempt to commit suicide is punished under section 309;
· Fourthly, all other cases [where no specific provisions regarding attempt are made]
are covered under section 511 which provides that the accused shall be punished with
one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for the offence or with
prescribed fine or with both.
4. Accomplishment Or Completion- The last stage in the commission of an offence

is its accomplishment or completion. If the accused succeeds in his attempt to
commit the crime, he will be guilty of the complete offence and if his attempt is
unsuccessful he will be guilty of an attempt only. For example, A fires at B with the
intention to kill him, if B dies, A will be guilty for committing the offence of murder
and if B is only injured, it will be a case of attempt to murder.
INDIAN PENAL CODE - AN INTRODUCTION
1. Title
(a) It consists of three words, namely :

- Indian
- Penal
- Code
(b) Out of these three, the key word is "code".
Code
It is systematic, complete, written collection of a body of laws, arranged methodically
in a coherent manner. A Code is the end product of codification.
Codification is a process which consists of compilation arrangement, systemisation

and promulgation of a body of laws by the authority competent to do so.
Examples :
(i) Code of Menu

(ii) Code of Napoleon
(iii) Code of Justinian
(iv) Hindu Code
(v) Indian Penal Code
(vi) Criminal Procedure Code
(vii) Civil Procedure Code
Codification - its advantages
(i) Simplicity
(ii) Symmetry
(iii) Intelligibility
(iv) Logical coherence
(v) Certainty
Penal
It is an adjective. It qualifies the noun "code". It means "relating to punishment".
Indian Penal Code is a penal statute, because it not only defines offences but also
prescribes punishments for commission of such offences.
"Indian"
The term "Indian" signifies that it is the penal code for India. The preamble indicates
that the I.P.C. was enacted to provide a General Penal Code for India.
2. Historical Background
The year 1833 was very crucial in the history of development of law in British
India.The Charter Act of 1833 was passed by the British parliament with a
view to facilitating codification of Indian Laws. The Charter Act of 1833
● established an All India Legislature namely Governor General in

Council, for the whole of British India.
● created the office of Law Member in that Council.
● provided for the appointment of a Law Commission.
Mr. T.B. Macaulay was appointed to fill the office of the Law Member. In
Pursuance of the Charter Act of 1833, the first Law Commission was set up in
1834. Mr. Macaulay, later on Lord Macaulay, became its President. The first
task assigned to the Law Commission was to prepare a draft penal code for
India. A draft Code was drawn up and submitted to the Governor-General in
Council on the 14th October 1837. The draft was then circulated to the
Judges and the Legal Advisers of the crown for eliciting their comments and
views. It was thereafter revised thoroughly. The bill so revised remained
pigeon-holed for many years. It was ultimately passed and placed on the
statute book on the 6th October 1860.
3. I.P.C. its nature
It is a codifying statute. It contains the general law of crimes in India. It is a

substantive law. The Code of Criminal Procedure is an adjective law. It is
exhaustive in respect of the matters covered by it. It is a complete Code.
It lays down the general principles of criminal liability. It also provides
for general exceptions to criminal liability. It defines specific offences and
prescribes punishments therefore.
4. Scheme of the Code
(a) The Code is broadly divided into twenty-three Chapters.

(b) To be more precise, the Code at present contains 26 Chapters, because three
Chapters, namely, VA, IXA and XXA have been added subsequently.
(c) Each Chapter is again sub-divided into several Sections.
(d) Each Section has been given a numeral figure for distinguishing it from the
others.
(e) The last Section of the IPC bears the number 511.
(f) That, however, does not imply that the IPC has 511 Sections.
(g) Many Sections have been added and several Sections have been omitted.
6. Arrangement :
(a) There are two broad divisions of the Code, they are :
(i) General Principles and

(ii) Specific offences.
(b) Specific offences may be roughly categorised under two heads, namely (i)
offences against the State and the public and (ii) Offences against the person
and the property.
(c) The general principles are embodied in Chapters I, II, III, IV, V, VA and
XXIII as detailed below :
Chapter I - Title and extent of operation of the Code.
Chapter II - Definition of certain terms.
Chapter III- Punishments. (General)
Chapter IV - General Exceptions
Chapter V- Abatement of offences
Chapter VA - Criminal conspiracy
Chapter XXIII - Criminal Attempts
(d) Specific offences
Chapter VI to - Offences against the State and the public

Chapter XV
Chapter XVI - Offences affecting human body.
Chapter XVII- Offences against the properties
(Corporeal and Incorporeal)
Chapter XIX - Miscellaneous offences to Chap. XXII
7. Jurisdiction
(a) IPC has two kinds of jurisdiction, namely,

(i) Intra-territorial (Sec.2).
(ii) Extra-territorial (Sec.3 and 4).
(b) If any offence under the IPC is committed by a person within the territory of
India, whether Indian or foreigner, he is liable to be prosecuted and punished
by the court in India having jurisdiction.
(c) If an Indian commits an act of commission or omission outside India, which

is an offence under the IPC, he may still be prosecuted and punished under
the IPC by a competent Indian Court, even though the act may not constitute
an offence under the law of that land.
(d) If any offence under the IPC is committed on any ship or aircraft, registered
in India, the person committing it shall be liable to be dealt with under the
IPC by a competent Indian Court, even though the ship or aircraft, at the time
of commission of such offence has remained outside India.
Note : (i In this context, reference may be made to Sec.188 of the Criminal

Procedure Code.
(ii) A person can not however, be prosecuted and punished twice for the
same offence, one under the IPC and the other under the Foreign Law.
KIDNAPPING, ABDUCTION AND DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
KIDNAPPING & ABDUCTION DISCUSSED WITH RECENT CASE LAWS
AND STATISTICS
1. INTRODUCTION
In the terminology of the common law in many jurisdictions (according to Black’s
Law Dictionary), the crime of kidnapping is labeled abduction when the victim is a
woman. In modern usage, kidnapping or abduction of a child is often called child
stealing, particularly when done not to collect a ransom, but rather with the intention
of keeping the child permanently (often in a case where the child’s parents are
divorced or legally separated, whereupon the parent who does not have legal custody
will commit the act; then also known as “child napping”). The word “kidnapping”
was originally “kid nabbing”, in other words slang for “child stealing”, but is no
longer restricted to the case of a child victim.1
Chapter XVI of the Indian Penal Code - which deals with offences affecting human
development, covers Kidnapping and Abduction.
1. Relevant Sections
(a) Section 359 to Section 369 IPC = 11 sections

(b) Additions - 363-A, 364-A, 366-A and 366-B IPC = 4 sections.
2. Broad Structure
(i) Section 359 - two kinds of kidnapping, namely

(a) Kidnapping from India
(b) Kidnapping from lawful guardianship
1
http://www.man.org.np/mdcampus/ppt/17-Kidnapping%20and%20extortion-Ranendra%20Man.ppt,
(ii) Section 360 - Kidnapping from India - Definition
(iii) Section 361- Kidnapping from lawful guardianship - Definition
(iv) Section 362 - Abduction - Definition
(v) Section 363 - Punishment for Kidnapping
(vi) Section 363-A-Kidnapping or maiming for begging - penal.
(vii) Section 364-A - Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder-penal.
(viii) Section 364-A - Kidnapping or abducting for ransom etc. - penal (Most
aggravated form).
(ix) Section 365 - Kidnapping or abducting with intent to confine persons
wrongfully and secretly - penal.
(x) Section 366 - Kidnapping or abducting woman to compel her marriage
or to cause her defilement - penal.
(xi) Section 367 - Kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to
grievous hurt, slavery etc. - penal.
(xii) Section 368 - Wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement a
Kidnapped or abducted person - punishment same as prescribed for
kidnapping or abduction.
(xiii) Section 369 - Kidnapping or abducting child under ten years with
intent to steal from her person - penal.
3. Kidnapping from India
(a) Definition - Section 360 IPC

(b) Penal - Section 363 IPC
(c) Ingredients -
(i) To Convey any person
(ii) Beyond the limits of India
(iii) Without the consent of that person or his/her guardian
(d) Explanatory notes
(i) To convey is to carry from one place to another.
(ii) It should be from a place inside India to a place outside India.
(iii) Guardian here means any person legally competent to given
consent on behalf of a minor or insane.
(iv) For Consent, please read Section 90 IPC. Consent given under
misrepresentation of fact is no consent.
(e) Example
A took "W" a woman, from India to Ceylon, on the representation that

she would be married to his son "S". After arrival in Ceylon, the
promised marriage was not solemnised. On the contrary, "W" was
employed in a Tea Estate there. A committed as offence as defined
u/s 360 IPC.
4. Kidnapping from Lawful Guardianship
(a) Definition - Section 361 IPC

(b) Penal
(i) Ordinary form (Sec. 363 IPC)
(ii) Aggravated forms - Sec. 363-A, 364, 364-A, 365,
367 and 369 IPC
(iii Punishment for wrongfully concealing or confining
kidnapped person – 368 IPC
(c) Ingredients of the offence of kidnapping from lawful
guardianship.
(i) Taking or enticing away

(a) a minor if male, under 16
if female, under 18
or
(b) a person of unsound mind
(ii) Out of the keeping of the lawful guardianship
(iii) Without the Consent of the guardian
(d) Explanatory Notes -
(i) Kidnapping literally means "child - stealing"

(ii) To take is to cause to go, to escort or to get into
possession
(iii) Taking need not be by force
(iv) The two expressions "Taking" and "allowing a minor to
accompany" are not identical.
(v) To entice is to allure by exciting hope or desire
(vi) Enticing may also be a mode of taking
(vii) In taking, the mental attitude of the minor is immaterial.
(viii) In enticement, the minor is induced to do a thing.
(ix) In kidnapping, intent of the offender is irrelevant
(x) It is not necessary that the Minor must be in the physical
possession of the guardian. It is enough if the minor is
under the control of the guardian.
(xi) Violation of the possession of the guardian is the essence
of the offence.
(xii) It is intended to protect the minors and insanes.
6. Abduction - Ingredients
(i) Compelling by force

or
Inducing by deceitful means
(ii) a person to go from any place
7. Explanatory Notes
(a) Section 362 defines "Abduction" but does not create an offence.
(b) Abduction per se (by itself, taken alone) is not an offence.
(c) Abduction is an offence only when it is accompanied by one of the
intentions mentioned in the subsequent Sections such as 364, 365 and
366.
1.1 Child Abduction

Child abduction can refer to children being taken away without their parents’
consent, but with the child’s consent. In England and Wales it is child abduction to
take away a child under the age of 16 without parental consent. Abduction is the
crime in English law of taking a) a girl under 16 from possession of her parent, or
guardian, or b) a girl of 18 or defective woman of any age from such possession of
unlawful sexual intercourse, or c) a girl under 21 to marry or have sexual intercourse,
or d) taking away and detaining any woman with the intention that she shall marry or
have unlawful sexual intercourse with a person, by force, or for the sake of her
property. Abduction or kidnapping any child is also an offence. Abduction of voters
is also a criminal act.2
1.2. Kidnapping
Kidnapping, according to Walker,3 is the common name for the common law
offence of carrying away, or secreting, of any person against his will, or against the
2
Walker, “Oxford Companion to Law”, Oxford Publications, New Delhi, 20th Edition, 1980, pg. 701
3
Ibid, pg.3
will of his lawful guardians. It may be constituted by false imprisonment, which is
total restraint of a person and his confinement without lawful authority or
justification.
1.3. Ten Conditions, Of Kidnapping In IPC:

India has comprehensive legislation to counter kidnapping, with the Indian Penal
Code outlining 10 specific offences related to the purpose of the kidnapping. These
are-
● Kidnapping a minor for purposes of begging;
● Kidnapping in order to murder;
● Kidnapping for ransom;
● Kidnapping with the intent to secretly and wrongfully confine a person;
● Kidnapping a woman to compel her into marriage;
● The importation of a girl from a foreign country;
● Kidnapping in order to subject a person to grievous harm, including slavery
kidnapping a child under 10 years old;
● Stealing or buying a minor for the purpose of prostitution. 4
2. KIDNAPPING
Meaning of kidnapping in the local language include the abduction as synonym but
the real difference in the understanding is following:
2.1 Section 359:
Kidnapping: Kidnapping is of two kinds: kidnapping from India, and kidnapping
from lawful guardianship.
The literal meaning of kidnapping is child stealing.
The draftsmen of the code said:
“the crime of kidnapping consists, according to our definition of it, in conveying a
person without his consent or the consent of some person legally authorized to
4
http://www.man.org.np/mdcampus/ppt/17-Kidnapping%20and%20extortion-Ranendra%20Man.ppt.,
consent on his behalf, or with such consent obtained by deception, out of the
protection of the law, or of those whom the law has appointed his guardians. ”
“This offence may be committed on a child by removing that child out of the
keeping of its lawful guardian or guardians. On a grown-up man it can be committed
only by conveying him beyond the limits of the Company’s territories, or by receiving
him on board of a ship for that purpose.”
“The carrying of a grown up person by force from one place within the Company’s
territories to another, and the enslaving him within the Company’s territories, are
offences sufficiently provided for under the heads of restraint and confinement. The
enticing of a grown-up person by false promises to go from place , may be a subject
for a civil action, and , under circumstances, for a criminal prosecution; but it does
not appear to us to come properly under the head of kidnapping.” 5
In Badlu Shah v Emperor 6 it was held that Kidnapping and abduction do not include
the offence of wrongful confinement or keeping, in confinement, a kidnapped
person.7
The words ‘kidnapping’ and ‘abduction’ do not include the offence of wrongful
confinement or keeping in confinement a kidnapped person.
2.2 Section 360:

Kidnapping from India: Whoever conveys any person beyond the limits of India
without the consent of that person, or of some person legally authorized to consent
on behalf of that person, is said to kidnap that person from India.
5
K.K Singh and R.Bagga, “Indian Penal Code”, The Law Book Company, Allahabad, 2nd edition, 1994,
pg.2.
6
AIR 1929 All 454
7
Sarvaria SK, “RA Nelson’s Indian Penal Code” ed. 9th , Vol. 3, LexisNexis Butterworths Publications,
New Delhi pg. 3512
Essential ingredients: The following are the essential ingredients of the offence under
this section:
1) Conveyance of a person: To convey means to carry from one place to another.
The conveyance or carrying is a continuous process until the destination is
reached. In the case of any offence under this section, the destination must be
some foreign territory.
2) Beyond the limits of India: these words in the section indicate that for an
offence under it must be to some foreign territory.
3) Without the consent of that person or of some person legally authorized to
consent on behalf of that person: A consent given under a misapprehension
of fact, is not true consent.8
2.3 Section 361:

Kidnapping from lawful guardianship: Whoever takes or entices any minor under
sixteen years of age if a male, or under eighteen years of age if a female, or any
person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such minor or
person of unsound mind, without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap
such minor or person from lawful guardianship
The offence under this section may be committed in respect of either a minor or a
person of unsound mind. To kidnap a grown-up person, therefore would not amount
to an offence under it.9
The object of this section is at least as much to protect children of tender age from
being abducted or seduced for improper purposes, as for the protection of the rights
8
K.K Singh and R.Bagga, “Indian Penal Code”, The Law Book Company, Allahabad, 2nd edition, 1994,
pg.3.
9
Ratanlal DhirajLal, “Indian Penal Code”, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur, 13th Edition
(Reprint 2004 Edition) 2008, pg. 649.
of parents and guardians having the lawful charge or custody of minors or insane
persons.
Ingredients: This section has four main essentials10:
1. Taking or enticing away a minor person or a person of unsound mind.
2. Such minor must be under the age of sixteen years, if male, or under the age of
eighteen years, if a female.
3. The taking away or enticing must be out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of
such minor or person of unsound mind.
4. Such enticing away must be without the consent of the lawful guardian.
The taking need not be by force, actual or constructive, and it is immaterial whether
the girl consents or not. There must be a taking of the child out of the possession of
the parent. If a child leaves its parent’s house for a particular purpose with their
consent, it cannot be said to be out of the parent’s keeping. 11
The offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship is complete when the minor is
actually taken from lawful guardianship; it is not an offence continuing so long as the
minor is kept out of such guardianship. In determining whether a person takes a
minor out of the lawful guardian, the distance to which the minor is taken away is
immaterial. The act of taking is not, in the proper sense of the term, a continuous act:
when once the boy or girl has been actually taken out of the keeping, the act is a
completed one. If continuous, it would be difficult to say when the continuous taking
ceased; it could only be when the boy or girl was actually restored to the keeping of
the guardian.12
Enticing is an act of the accused by which the person kidnapped is induced of his
own accord to go to the kidnapper. The word ‘entice’ involves an idea of inducement
10
Restated in Biswanath Mallick v. State of Orissa, 1995 CrLj 1416 (Ori).
11
(Reprint 2004 Edition) 2008 at pg. 650.
12
Ibid.
or allurement by exciting hope or desire in the other. It may take many forms difficult
to visualize. The word Taking in this section means nothing but physical taking.13
The word “keeping’ implies neither apprehension nor detention but rather
maintenance, protection and control, manifested not by continual action but as
available on necessity arising and this relation between the minor and the guardian is
certainly not dissolved so long as the minor can at will take advantage of it and place
herself within the sphere of its operation.14
The guardianship of the mother does not cease while a minor is in the possession of
another person who has been lawfully entrusted with the care and custody of such
minor by the mother.15If the minor is not in the custody of a lawful guardian, the
offence cannot be committed, whatever the belief of the taker may be. The taking or
enticing of the minor out of the keeping of the legal guardian must be without his
consent. The consent of the minor is immaterial. If a man by false and fraudulent
representation induce the parents of a girl to allow him to take her away, such taking
will amount to kidnapping. In case of Parkash v. State of Haryana 16 it was said that
the two words ‘takes’ and ‘entices’ as used in Section 361, IPC are intended to be read
together so that each takes to some extent its colour and content from the other. If
the minor leaves her paternal home completely uninfluenced by any promise, offer or
inducement emanating from the guilty party, then the latter cannot be considered to
have committed the offence as defined in Section 361, IPC. Consent given by the
guardian after the commission of the offence would not cure it. 17
The word ‘lawful’ must be literally construed so as to distinguish it from “legal
guardian” as a guardian maybe lawful without being legal. The expression “lawfully
13
Basu N.D., “Commentary on Indian Penal Code” ed. 10th, vol. 2, Ashoka Law House, New Delhi, 2007
pg. 1900
14
Vishnu v. State, 1997 Cr LJ 1724
15
K.K Ali, (1936) 15 Pat 817
16
2004 Cr.L.J. 595 SC
17
Ganesh, (1909) 31 All 448
entrusted” signifies that the care and custody of a minor. Entrustment means the
giving, handing over, or confiding of something by one person to another.
2.4 Section 363:

Punishment for Kidnapping: Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from lawful
guardianship shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extent to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
This section must be read with Section 361. The offence of kidnapping from lawful
guardianship penalized by this section is the offence which is defined by Section
361.18 The person against whom the offence is committed must be under the age of
sixteen, if a male, and under the age of eighteen years if a female. Where a girl of 23
years of age left her parents of her own will and married a man, section 363 or 366
was not attracted. 19 Where in a case of kidnapping the girl deposed that she had gone
with the accused voluntarily, his conviction u/s 363 was set aside. 20
18
Ratanlal DhirajLal, Indian Penal Code, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur, 13th Edition (Reprint
2004 Edition) 2008, p. 651
19
Oroos Fatima v Sr. Supdt of Police, Aligarh, 1993 CrLJ 1 (All)
20
Bhajan Lal v. State of U.P, 1996 CrLJ 460 (All)
3. ABDUCTION
As expand kidnapping, abduction is also a crime under Indian Penal Code it is

mentioned in following sections.
3.1 Section 362:

Abduction: “Whoever by force compels, or by any deceitful means induces, any
person to go from any place, is said to abduct that person”
This section merely gives a definition of the word “abduction” which occurs in some
of the penal provisions which follow. There is no such offence as abduction under
the Code, but abduction with certain intent is an offence. Force or fraud is essential.
Ingredients- this section requires two things21:
1. Forceful compulsion or inducement by deceitful means.
2. The object of such compulsion or inducement must be the going of a person from
any place.
Force in Section 362 means actual force and not merely a show or threat of force.
Deceitful means signifies anything intended to mislead another. It includes
inducement and its scope is very wide. The intention of the accused, one may say, is a
gravamen of the charge. The case of Rabinarayan Das22 is a pointer in this regard.
Here the prosecutrix was blind. She wanted to go to her school. However, the
petitioner took her to secretariat premises. Evidence of inducement is not
forthcoming and yet there was nothing to prove that the woman had gone there out
of her volition or free will.23
Abduction is a continuing offence. The abduction of a married woman comes under
section 366 and the actual validity or otherwise of the marriage is immaterial. Mere
21
2004 Edition) 2008, p. 657
22
1992 Cri LJ 269 at p.273
23
B.M. Gandhi, ‘Indian Penal Code’, Eastern Book Company,Lucknow, 2nd Edition, 2006, p. 528
abduction without a criminal intent of one of the kinds specified in the section is not
recognized as an offence.
4. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KIDNAPPING AND
ABDUCTION
The difference can be understood by the mentioned definition in a definitive way but
to go into dept, when we put the practical and theoretical implication the following
difference comesout in point
1. ‘Kidnapping’ is committed only in respect of a minor under sixteen years of

age if male and under eighteen years if a male or a person of unsound;
‘abduction’, in respect of a person of any age.
2. In ‘Kidnapping’, the person kidnapped is removed out of lawful guardianship.
A child without a guardian cannot be kidnapped. ‘Abduction’ has reference
exclusively to the person abducted.
3. In Kidnapping, the minor is simply taken away. The means used may be
innocent. In ‘Abduction’, force, compulsion, or deceitful means are used.
4. In kidnapping, consent of the person taken or enticed is immaterial; in
abduction, consent of the person moved, if freely and voluntarily given,
condones abduction.
5. In ‘kidnapping’ the intent of the offender is a wholly irrelevant consideration:
in abduction, it is the important factor.
6. Kidnapping from guardianship is a substantive offence under the Code; but
abduction is an auxiliary offence, not punishable by itself, but made criminal
only when it is done with one or other of the intents specified in S.364. 24
24
2004 Edition) 2008, p. 658
5. AGGRAVATED FORMS OF KIDNAPPING AND
ABDUCTION
Sections 363A to 369 are aggravated form of kidnapping and abduction. Kidnapping
is an offence in itself but abduction is not so the aggravated form not only offence
but they are only liability clause in the statute.
5.1 . Section 363A.

Kidnapping or maiming a minor for purposes of begging: (1) Whoever kidnaps any
minor or, not being the lawful guardian of a minor, obtains the custody of the minor,
in order that such minor may be employed or used for the purpose of begging shall
be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Whoever maims any minor in order that such minor can be employed or used for
the purposes of begging shall be punishable with imprisonment for life, and shall also
be liable to fine.
(3) Where any person, not being the lawful guardian of minor, employs or uses such
minor for the purpose of begging, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved,
that he kidnapped or otherwise obtained the custody of that minor in order that the
minor might be employed or used for the purposes of begging.
(4) In this section –
(a) “Begging” means;
(i) Soliciting or receiving alms in a public place, whether under the pretence of
singing, dancing, fortune-telling, performing tricks or selling articles or otherwise;
(ii) Entering on any private premises for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms;
(iii) Exposing or exhibiting, with the object of obtaining or e extorting alms, any sore,
wound, injury, deformity or disease, whether of himself or of nay other person or of
an animal;
(iv) Using a minor as an exhibit for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms;
(b) “Minor” means-
(i) In the case of a male, a person under sixteen years of age; and
(ii) In the case of a female, a person under eighteen years of age.
This Section was inserted in 1959 to put down effectively the evil of kidnapping
children for exploiting them for begging. There are cases wherein minors are
kidnapped are kidnapped and castrated with a view to make them eunuchs who
could be useful as professional beggars. The offence under Section 363-A is triable by
a Magistrate of the first class while under 363 –A(2) is triable by a Court of Sessions.
Barring this the offence under 363-A is cognizable, not bailable and not
compoundable.25
Although men are also victimized, the overwhelming majority of those trafficked are
women and children. According to official estimates, between 1 and 2 million women
and children are trafficked each year worldwide for forced labour, domestic servitude,
or sexual exploitation. An estimated 50,000 persons are trafficked each year to the
United States. Trafficking is now considered the third largest source of profits for
organized crime, behind only drugs and guns, generating billions of dollars annually.
Child Trafficking26 is an inhumane offence against defenseless and innocent children.

Millions of children are forcibly trafficked or coerced across borders only to be sold
in the sex trade, for illegal adoption, for criminal activities, for work as domestic
servants, beggars, soldiers, or for other purposes. The urgency to combat trafficking
in children is understandable considering the heinous nature of the phenomenon – it
is an affront to principles of human dignity and morality and a severe violation of
basic human rights. Principle 9 of the Geneva Declaration of Rights of the Child of
25
B.M. Gandhi, “Indian Penal Code”, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 2nd Edition, 2006, p. 529
26
Van Bueren ,“The International Law on the Rights of a Child,” Kluwer 1989 – “Trafficking” in children
is defined as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of a child for the purposes of
exploitation.
1924 states explicitly that the “The child shall be protected against all forms of
neglect, cruelty and exploitation. He shall not be the subject of traffic, in any form.” 27
Despite being in existence for centuries, Child Trafficking has only in recent years
emerged as an issue of global concern due to the worldwide consensus and co-
operation to join hands in fighting this heinous crime; With the amplification of
international and national legal apparatus, the trafficking of human beings is
perceived to be more than a crime – it is a serious violation of human rights,
children’s rights, labour rights and basic fundamental freedoms. Child Trafficking has
become highly lucrative and increasingly worthwhile as women and children are
considered commodities which can be “sold” several times over. With the permeable
borders and the advancement of technology child trafficking has expanded around
the Globe where the routes for trafficking children alter according to local conditions
or supply and demand factors. It is no longer adequate to say that victims are
trafficked from poor to the wealthier ones.
Violence is not the necessary mode for child trafficking, as has been often
misconceived, as the victims are tricked, deceived, forced, sold by their parents or
otherwise coerced into situations, which they later cannot escape from. 28
5.2 . Section 364:

Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder: Whoever kidnaps or abducts any
person in order that such person may be murdered or may be so disposed of as to
be put in danger of being murdered, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or
rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be
liable to fine.
27
Puan Sri Datin Seri N. Saraswathy Devi, ‘Child Trafficking :The Recent emergence of the global issue”,
retrieved from http://www.ewla.org/wf_dl/paper_Devi.doc
28
To establish an offence under this section it must be proved that the person charged
with the offence had the intention at the time of the kidnapping or abduction that the
person will be murdered or so disposed of as to be put in danger of being
murdered.29 If no evidence is available on the score, the accused cannot be convicted
under this section. Where the witnesses saw the party of the accused persons forcibly
taking away a woman, who was found dead a week later, and though there was
nothing to connect them with the murder, there was evidence of the body being
destroyed by them, they were convicted not of murder but only under this section
and s. 201 for destroying evidence. 30 In another case the two accused and the third
person were seen disappearing together. They had drinks and moved away. The one
who did not return home, his moustache, torn kurta and a few drops of blood were
found by the side of a swollen river. Whether he was pushed, or he slipped could not
be known. His companions were not convicted under this section. 31 Where the
accused persons, on false pretext of repaying the money to the deceased, induced him
to accompany them to a distant place and after killing him, threw the body in a
private ravine, their conviction under s. 364 along with sections 300 and 201 was
upheld.32
In Sacha Singh v. State of Punjab33, during the period of insurgency, two young Sikh
boys were abducted by armed assailants from their house on a dark night in the sight
of their parents. They were killed within a short while by the abductors. The
abductors were charged with murder. It was held that when more persons than one
have abducted the victim, who was later murdered is within the legal province of the
court to justifiably draw a presumption depending on the factual situation that all the
29
2004 Edition) 2008, p. 660
30
Pati Ram v. State of U.P., 1990 Cr LJ 447 (All.).
31
Mahavir v. State of U.P, 1990 Cr LJ 1605 (All).
32
Valiyaveetil Ashraf v State, 1994 Cr LJ 555 (Ker).
33
2001 Cr LJ 1734 (SC).
abductors are responsible for murder. Section 34 of the Penal code could be invoked
for the aid to meet the ends of justice.34
An abducted victim was murdered later on. It was held that the court can, depending
on the factual situation, draw the presumption that the abductors are responsible for
the murder. It is their responsibility to explain to the court what they had done with
the victim. 35
5.3 . Section 364-A

Kidnapping for ransom, etc: Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person or keeps a
person in detention of the such kidnapping or abduction and threatens to cause
death or hurt to such person, or by his conduct gives rise to a reasonable
apprehension that such person may be put death or hurt, or causes hurt or death to
such person in order to compel the Government or any foreign State or international
inter-governmental organization or any other person to do or abstain from doing any
act or to pay a ransom, shall be punishable with death, or imprisonment for life, and
shall also be liable to fine.
The kidnapped child was recovered from the custody of the accused by the raiding
party. The letter demanding ransom was recovered from the pocket of the accused.
He had neither posted it nor contacted any body for the purpose for three days till his
arrest. The court said that there was no demand for ransom. An offence under this
section was not made out. Conviction under section 363 and 365 was held proper. 36
Hence the ingredients of this section are37:
1. Kidnapping or abducting any person
2. Threatens to cause death or hurt to such person
34
S.N. Mishra, “Indian Penal Code”, Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 14th Edition, 2006 at pg. 583.
35
Sacha Singh v. State of Punjab, 2001 Cr LJ 1734 (SC).
36
Netra Pal v. State (NCT) of Delhi, 2001 Cr LJ 1669 (Del)
37
Ratanlal DhirajLal, “Indian Penal Code”, LexisNexis Butterworth’s Wadhwa, Nagpur, 13th Edition
3. Compelling the Government or any person to pay ransom.
Recent Case:
P. Liaquat Ali Khan v. State of Andhra Pradesh38
A girl named Kearthi aged about 3 years was studying Nursery class in Sri Lakshmi
English Medium School. PW-5 was her class teacher and PW- 6 the principal of
school. PW-1 is grandfather and PW-2 is father of the said victim minor girl Kearthi.
PW-7 is their driver and PW- 3 is maid servant. On 3-7-2001, PW-7, the driver
dropped the girl at the school at about 8-30 am. At about 8-45 am one person came
to her class, informed the PW-5 her class teacher that parents of the child forgot to
give syrup to her and on his request the girl was sent with him to administer the
same. After noticing that the child has been carried away by him, the class teacher
instructed PW-3 the maid servant to stop him. The said person did not stop though
cautioned by PW-3 and so, she asked PW-8 who was coming by scooter to stop that
person. When PW-8 stopped him and enquired about the matter, the said person
informed that he was taking the child for administering syrup and saying so, he
boarded a bus and went away. Thereafter, PW-3 went to shop of PW-4 and enquired
from him who also informed her about the taking away of the child by said person.
Later PW-3 and PW-5 went to PW-6 and informed about the incident to her, who in
turn informed about the incident to the parents of the child. Parents came to the
school, searched for the child in N.R. Peta area of Krnool and surrounding places.
PW-3 and PW-5 narrated the physical features of the kidnapper. PW-12 registered
the case on the basis of report and PW-13 took up further investigation.
Later on 4-7-2001 a letter demanding Rs. 1 crore for releasing the child was received
by PW-1, who handed over the same of PW-13, the investigation officer. On 9-7-
2001 another letter addressed in the name of PW-2 was dropped in the house of PW-
9 a neighbor of PW-1 demanding Rs.75 Lakhs with instruction to keep the amount in
38
(2009) 3 Cr. L.J. 3736 (S.C.)
a bag and place it under a culvert which letter was also handed over to PW-13. On
10-7-2001 at about 12-30 pm on instruction of PW-13 a bag containing paper was
placed at the place desired. Some persons were hiding in a nearby thorny bushes
around the culvert. At about 1 pm the accused came to that place by a scooter picked
up the bag and when he reached the road constables surrounded and caught hold of
him and on enquiry the accused furnished his particulars. Thereafter the accused,
took the police to a house which was locked from outsides. The accused opened the
doors and led them to rear side bathroom where the child was found. PW-2 identified
the child. Trial court held him guilty and passed the sentence of life imprisonment. It
was held by the Supreme Court in appeal that section 364-a deals with separate type
of offence where a ransom is distinguishing feature. In this case demand of ransom
has clearly established and the role played by the accused has been analysed by the
Courts below. The child was recovered on disclosure made by the accused ho had
kept him locked in a house. Therefore the accused was held liable to be convicted
under section 364-A, IPC.
5.4. Section 365:
Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person:
Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person with intent to cause that person to be
secretly and wrongfully confined, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
Section 365 requires an intention to confine a person secretly and wrongfully.

Holding a person to ransom by his abductors is an offence under this section. 39
Where there was sufficient evidence to show that the victim woman abducted from
her house and then taken to different places which included confinement to one
39
B.M. Gandhi, ‘Indian Penal Code’, Eastern Book Company,Lucknow, 2nd Edition, 2006 at p.530
place until she was recovered by the police, it was held that the accused could be
convicted under this section and S. 368 but not section 366.40
There was ample evidence to show that the victim was taken away under deceit and
then sold to a brothel house. She was not a minor at the time of the incident.
Therefore, the accused could not be convicted under S. 366 or 372. They could be
convicted under S.365.41
5.5 Section 366:

Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc: Whoever
kidnaps or abducts any woman with intent that she may be compelled, or knowing it
to be likely that she will be compelled, to marry any person against her will, or in
order that she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse, or knowing it to be
likely that she will be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and
shall also be liable to fine; and whoever, by means of criminal intimidation as defined
in this Code or of abuse of authority or any other method of compulsion, induces
any woman to go from any place with intent that she may be, or knowing that it is
likely she will be, forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with another person shall be
punished as aforesaid.
Where a woman has no intention of marriage or lawful intercourse when kidnapped,

this section applies.42
Ingredients: this section requires:
1. Kidnapping or abducting of any woman

2. Such Kidnapping or abducting must be-
40
Fiyaz Ahmed v. State of Bihar, 1990 Cr LJ 2241.
41
Shaik Ramjan v State, 1999 Cr LJ 2161.
42
i) with intent that she may be compelled or knowing it to be likely that she
will be compelled to marry any person against her will or
ii) in order that she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse, or
knowing it to be likely that she will be forced or seduced to illicit
intercourse; or
iii) by means of criminal intimidation or otherwise by inducing any woman
to go from place with the intent that she may be, or knowing that she
will be, forced or seduced to illicit intercourse. 43
It is immaterial whether the woman kidnapped is a married woman or not.
5.5.1 KIDNAPS OR ABDUCTS ANY WOMAN:

If the girl was eighteen or over, she could only be abducted and not kidnapped, but
if she was under eighteen she could be kidnapped as well as abducted if the taking
was by force or the taking or enticing was by deceitful means. 44
Voluntarily going
away for marriage is not an offence under this section. Doubts about age, if not
resolved satisfactorily, would go in favor of the accused. 45
5.5.2 WITH THE INTENT THAT SHE MAY BE COMPELLED TO MARRY

ANY PERSON AGAINST HER WILL :
The intention of the accused is the basis and the gravamen of the offence under this
section. The volition, the intention and the conduct of the woman do not determine
the offence; they can only bear upon the intent with which the accused kidnapped or
abducted the woman.46 Where only confinement was established, the Supreme Court
held that the conviction was possible under S. 365 and 368 and not 366. 47 Once the
necessary intent of the accused is established the offence is complete, whether or not
43
Ibid.
44
Nawabkhan v. State, 1990 Cr LJ 1179 (MP)
45
Satish Kumar v. State, 1988 Cr LJ 565 (Del)
46
Ratanlal DhirajLal, “Indian Penal Code”, LexisNexis Butterworth’s Wadhwa, Nagpur, 13th Edition
47
Fiyaz Ahmad v. State of Bihar, 1990 Cr LJ 2241
the accused succeeded in effecting his purpose, and whether or not in the event the
woman consented to the marriage or the illicit intercourse. 48
5.5.3 FORCED OR SEDUCED TO ILLICIT INTERCOURSE:

The word ‘forced’ is used in its ordinary dictionary sense and includes force by stress
of circumstances. The expression ‘seduced’, used in this section and section 366-A,
means inducing a woman to submit to illicit intercourse at any time. 49
Where a girl
under eighteen years of age is taken away from the keeping of her father by the
accused with the object of marriage and section, he is guilty of an offence under this
section, notwithstanding the fact that the girl accompanied him if her own accord and
not as a result of force or misrepresentation. Mere abduction does not bring an
accused under the ambit of Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code (Kidnapping
abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage).
Unless the prosecution proves that the abduction is for the purposes mentioned in
Section 366, IPC, the Court cannot hold the accused guilty and punish him under the
section.
The Supreme Court made these observations while hearing an appeal challenging a
conviction under Section 366 of the IPC.
Gabbu was tried for committing offences under Section 366. The Session Court
convicted the accused-appellant under Sections 366 and sentenced him to undergo
two years rigorous imprisonment. The High Court in the appeal preferred by the
accused appellant confirmed the order of the Session Court following which the
Supreme Court was moved.
A Division Bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and P P Naolekar, while setting

aside the conviction and allowing the appeal observed that that a mere finding that a
48
Khalil-Ur-rahman, (1933) 11 Ran 213 (FB)
49
Ramesh, (1962) 64 Bom LR 780 (SC)
mere finding that a woman was abducted is not enough. It must be further proved
that the accused abducted the woman with an intent that she may be compelled, or
knowing it to be likely that she will be compelled to marry any person or in order that
she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse or knowing it to be likely that she
will be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse. Further, the Bench observed that is
necessary for the prosecution to prove that the accused induced the complainant-
woman or compelled by force to go from any place that such inducement was by
deceitful means.
While dealing with the instant case the Bench observed that the prosecutrix had
nowhere alleged that she was abducted with the intention to commit an offence. In
overall consideration of the material placed on record by the prosecution, we do not
find that the prosecution has proved that the accused-appellant has committed an
offence under Section 366, IPC. There is a doubt as to the place of incident and the
motive of the accused in taking away the prosecutrix. We find it difficult to believe in
the story put up by the prosecutrix that she was forced to leave her place of residence
under a threat by showing a knife to her, the court also observed. In order to
constitute an offence a person must be carried off.
Recent Case:
State of Maharashtra v. Gajanan @ Hemant Janardhan Wankhede50
Prosecutrix, who is the daughter of complainant Ambaprasad Mishra, was residing
with the family in Mangilal plots, Amravati. The accused-respondent was also the
resident of the same locality. The prosecutrix was educated upto 7 th standard and she
had taken her education in Municipal School No. 5 at Amravati. Her date of birth
recorded in official documents was 4.6.1976 and the incident of kidnapping her by
the accused took place on 21.4.1991. As such she was aged 14 years, 10 months and
17 days at the time of the incident. On 21.4.1991, the accused sent a message to
prosecutrix through one Sachin and called her to come with a bag at a place near her
50
2008 Cr LJ 3549
school. Accordingly, the prosecutrix went at that place. Then the accused, prosecutrix
and Sachin went by an autorickshaw to Chinchfail area of Amravati where the
grandmother of the accused was residing. They reached there at about 1.00 p.m. The
accused took his suitcase. Then the accused and prosecutrix who were accompanied
by Sachin, arrived by an autorickshaw at Badnera Railway station. Sachin went back
to Amravati from Badnera Railway Station and the accused and prosecutrix arrived at
Nagpur by train. They reached Nagpur at about 5.00 p.m. Therefrom they went to
Jhansi. They reached Jhansi early in the morning, i.e. at about 4.00 to 5.00 a.m. At
Jhansi, they went to the house of the sister of the accused namely Lata. They stayed
in one separate room in the house of accused’s sister for about 8 to 10 days. During
this period, they used to sleep in that room and the accused practically on every night
performed sexual intercourse with prosecutrix. Then from Jhansi, the accused and
prosecutrix arrived at Bichona and stayed there in the house of one Rajput for about
3-4 days and the accused performed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix twice.
Then from Bichona, both of them came to Mundai. They resided at Mundai in the
house of one Narmadaprasad for about one and half months. From Mundai, the
accused and prosecutrix arrived at Chinchkhed via Nagpur and Amravati and stayed
in the house of the sister of the accused for about 4-5 days. Again from Chinchkhed,
they went to Nagpur and stayed in the house of one friend of the accused for about
20 days. The accused was working as a labourer during this period. The accused and
the prosecutrix then again came back to Chinchkhed, stayed there for one day and
then went to Katsoor. They stayed at Katsoor at the house of maternal aunt of the
accused for about 4-5 days. Then they came to Paratwada and therefrom went to
village Talegaon where they stayed with the aunt of the accused. Then from
Talegaon, they went to Delhi. But since the address of the person within whom they
were going to stay at that place was not available, they returned back to Talegaon.
During all these days, the accused performed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.
While at Talegaon, the father of the prosecutrix and Rajapeth (Amravati) Police
arrived there. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded and she was taken back.
Meanwhile, immediately on the next day of the occurrence, i.e. 22.4.1991, the father
of the prosecutrix on coming to know the fact about kidnapping his daughter by the
accused, had lodged the report in Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati, on the strength
of which the offence under Sections 363 and 366 IPC was registered as Crime No.
184 of 1991. Then on 28.8.1991, the prosecutrix and the accused were traced at
Talegaon and accused was arrested. Prosecutrix was referred to Women’s Hospital,
Amravati, for her medical examination. The Medical Officer concerned examined her
and found that her hymen was ruptured, she was habituated to sexual intercourse and
she was carrying pregnancy of 4 to 6 weeks. On arrest of the accused, he was also
referred for medical examination and the Medical Officer concerned opined that he
was capable of committing sexual intercourse. The ossification test of the girl was
also carried out and the opinion of the concerned Medical Officer was that the girl
was aged about 14 to 16 years. The radiological examination of the accused was also
performed wherein it was found that he was aged about 20 years. The necessary
investigation was conducted and on completion of the same the accused stood charge
sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC. The
conclusions of the High Court were totally erroneous. The High Court came to
presumptuous conclusion about the date of birth of the victim. The inevitable
conclusion was that the judgment of the High Court is unsustainable, and was set
aside. The respondent was surrendered to custody to serve the remainder of the
sentences.
5.6 Section 366 A:

Procuration of minor girl: Whoever, by any means whatsoever, induces any minor
girl under the age of eighteen years to go from any place or to do any act with intent
that such girl may be, or knowing that it is likely that she will be, forced or seduced to
illicit intercourse with another person shall be punishable with imprisonment which
may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Sections 366 and 366 B are intended to punish the export and import of girls for
prostitution. Section 366 A deals with procuration of minor girls from one part of
India to another part. Section 366B makes it an offence to import into India from any
country outside India below the age of twenty one years for the purpose of
prostitution.51
Ingredients:
This section requires two things: 1. inducing a girl under eighteen years to go from
any place to do an act, 2. intention or knowledge that such girl will be forced or
seduced to illicit intercourse with a person.
An offence under this section is one of inducement with a particular object, and
when after the inducement the offenders offer the girl to several persons a fresh
offence is not committed at every fresh offer for sale.
1. Seduced: The word ‘seduced’ is used in the ordinary sense of enticing or

tempting irrespective of whether the minor girl has been previously
compelled or has submitted to illicit intercourse.
2. Age: It is necessary to prove the age of the prosecutrix to be below 18
years. In this case, the school certificate was considered to be the best
evidence.
Predominantly, women and children are trafficked in for the “sexual trade”.
The lack of employment in their native countries, force women and children into
illegal migration, through migrant traffickers who offer “package deals”. Deceptive
means such as false promises of careers in business, factories and households, are
used to lure the women and children to being trafficked. They are inevitably then
found imprisoned in brothels. In many cases, the women are lured to foreign
51
countries in the hope of obtaining legitimate work, where they are then paid salaries
and the poverty eventually forces them to resort to prostitution or to prostitute
themselves under duress.52
The trafficking of children is usually by way of kidnapping or abduction, once

abducted, threats and acts of violence are used to hold on to the victims. In Thailand
for instance, brothel managers employ agents to collect photos of young girls as they
go to school. The girls are then selected by the managers and upon selection the girls
are ordered by them for the agents to kidnap.
Aside from the kidnapping or abduction, Asian Countries have also faced the
poverty driven selling of “daughters” by the impoverished families to “agents” for
sometimes as low as US$200 a child, which children are then re-sold to traffickers.
The sale of the girl child by her family, due to poverty, in turn places the financial
burden of supporting her family on the girl child. Such trafficking is an example of
non-violent trafficking of children. Also of large incidence is where the agents pose
as “potential husbands” used to deceive the family of the girl child into believing the
girl child and her “rich” husband will take over their financial burden, inevitably
however, the girl child is then either sold to traffickers or forced into prostitution.
However, one must remember that it benefits the traffickers to keep their victims in a
foreign environment where not only are they vulnerable for having entered a country
illegally, but are also disadvantaged because of their ignorance of the law, culture and
language of that country.53
52
53
For women and girls additional protection is provided in the Immoral Traffic
Prevention Act. This act was amended in 1956 to provide for more severe penalties
for offences involving children and minors. Under this act anyone who detains a
woman or girl in a brothel or on any other premise with the intent that the female
person shall have sexual intercourse with other persons is liable to punishment. To
facilitate prosecution, certain circumstances are presumed to constitute illegal
detainment. Thus if someone is found with a child in a brothel or a child that has
been sexually assaulted is found in a brothel it is presumed that the child is illegally
detained. Offenders are liable to a prison term from 7 years to life. These strict
liability provisions allow for a higher possibility of curbing the offence, which would
otherwise not be possible without the reversal of the burden of proof as has often
happened in drug-related offences.54
Recent Case:
Manjappa v. State of Karnataka55,
On 03.04.1997, Hanumanthappa, father of the victim, lodged a complaint alleging

that his daughter Shilpa, aged 13 years, was kidnapped by the appellants i.e. Vijay
M.S.Balakrishna Madiwalar and Manjappa herein on 24.01.1997 at about 11.00 a.m.
from his house and they had taken her to Bombay with an intention to force her to
have illicit intercourse and thereafter, had sold the victim to Shanta at Bombay for
Rs.5000/- for the purpose of prostitution and for immoral purposes. On the strength
of the said complaint, Kumarapatnam Police registered a case in Crime No. 41 of
1997 and started investigation. On 24.04.1997, on receiving information about the
victim, the Investigation Officer had gone to Bombay along with the panch witnesses
and the complainant, traced out the girl and the appellants herein and returned to
Kumarapatnam Police Station on 27.04.1997. The same day, the statement of the
victim Shilpa was recorded and she was sent to the C.G. Hospital Davanagere for
54
Ibid
55
(2010) IV Cr.L.J. 4729 (s.c.)
medical examination. The appellants herein and Shanta were arrested on 27.04.1997
and charged for the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 366A,
372, 373 read with 34 I.P.C. The prosecution examined six witnesses in support of its
case and marked several documents. The session judge convicted the Shanta and
Madiwalar but acquitted the Manjappa for section 366-A, 372 and 373 r/w 34 of IPC.
In appeal by state in high court the sentence of Shanta and Madiwalar was increased
to 7 year imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50,000/- and convicted Manjappa with same.
The supreme court confirmed the sentence of high court and rejected the appeal of
Madiwalar And Manjappa for reduction of sentence.
5.7. Section 366B:

Importation of girl from foreign country: Whoever imports into India from any
country outside India 3or from the State of Jammu and Kashmir any girl under the
age of twenty-one years with intent that she may be, or knowing it to be likely that
she will be, forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with another person, shall be
punishable with imprisonment which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable
to fine.
The Select Committee in their Report observed: “the case of girls imported from a
foreign country we propose to deal with by the insertion of a new section 366 B in
the Code. We are unanimously of opinion that the requirements of the Convention
will be substantially met by penalizing the importation of girls from a foreign country.
At the same time we have so worded the clause as to prevent its being made a dead-
letter by the adoption of the course of
importing the girl first into an Indian State. 56 After the coming into force of the
Constitution of India this section was amended to bring it in accord with the changed
circumstances.57
56
Gazette of India, dated February 10, 1923, Part V, p.79
57
B.M. Gandhi, “Indian Penal Code”, Eastern Book Company,Lucknow, 2nd Edition, 2006 at p.536
5.8 Section 367:
Kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to grievous hurt, slavery, etc:
Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person in order that such person may be subjected,
or may be so disposed of as to be put in danger of being subject to grievous hurt, or
slavery, or to unnatural lust of any person, or knowing it to be likely that such person
will be so subjected or disposed of, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
5.9 Section 368:

Wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement, kidnapped or abducted person:
Whoever, knowing that any person has been kidnapped or has been abducted,
wrongfully conceals or confines such person, shall be punished in the same manner
as if he dad kidnapped or abducted such person with the same intention or
knowledge, or for the same purpose as that with or for which he conceals or detains
such person in confinement.
This section does not apply to the principal offender but to those persons who assist
him in concealing any person who has been kidnapped. A kidnapper cannot be
convicted under this section.58
Ingredients of this section:
1. The person in question has been kidnapped
2. The accused knew that the said person had been kidnapped.
3. The accused having such knowledge wrongfully conceals or confines the
person concerned.
Apart from direct evidence these ingredients can be proved by facts and
circumstances of a particular case. 59 In Saroj Kumari case60 the appellant was found in
58
Fiyaz Ahmed v. State of Bihar, 1990 Cr LJ 2241
59
Saroj Kumari, 1973 Cr LJ 267
60
(1973) 3 SCC 669
possession of a newborn child. On asking, no explanation was given by her. She
pretended to conceal the child and claim it to be hers. It was a fact that she had not
delivered in the recent past. Since all the ingredients were established she was held to
be guilty of the offence. Knowledge of the assailant is the most important factor here.
For all practical and legal purposes, knowledge means the state of mind entertained
by a person with regard to existing facts which he has himself observed, or the
existence of which has been communicated to him by a person he has no reason to
doubt.61
5.10 Section 369:

Kidnapping or abducting child less than ten years with intent to steal from its person:
Whoever kidnaps or abducts any child under the age of ten years with the intention of
taking dishonestly any movable property from the person of such child, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
This section is intended to protect enticing away of children from their parents in
order to steal ornaments from the children. The offence being a serious one,
punishment is 7 years imprisonment and fine. It may however be noted that the
offence under 363 is included in this section. 62 The offence is cognizable, non
bailable, not compoundable and triable by a first class Magistrate.
61
B.M Gandhi, “Indian Penal Code”, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow,2nd Edition, 2006,p.537.
62
B.M Gandhi, “Indian Penal Code”, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow,2nd Edition, 2006,p.537.
6. SLAVERY AND FORCED LABOUR
Section 370 - Whoever imports, export, removes, buys, sells or disposes of any
person as a slave, or accepts, receives or detains against his will any person as
slave, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 371 - Whoever habitually imports, exports, removes, buys, sells, traffics
or deals in slaves, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life] or with
imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding the years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
Section 372 - Whoever sells, lets to hire, or otherwise disposes of any 1[person
under the age of eighteen years with intent that such person shall at any age be
employed or used for the purpose of prostitution or illicit intercourse with any
person or for any unlawful and immoral purpose, or knowing it to be likely that
such person will at any age be] employed or used for any such purpose, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall be liable to fine.

Explanation I

When a female under the age of eighteen years sold, let for hire, or otherwise
disposed of to a prostitute or to any person who keeps or manages a brothel,
the person so disposing of such female shall, until the contrary is proved, be
presumed to have disposed of her with the intent that she shall be used for the
purpose of prostitution.

Explanation II

For the purposes of this section "illicit intercourse" means sexual intercourse
between persons not united by marriage or by any union or tie which, though
not amounting to a marriage, is recognised by the personal law or custom of the
community to which they belong or, where they belong to different
communities, of both such communities, as constituting between them a quasi
-marital relation.
7. THE IMMORAL TRAFFIC (PREVENTION) ACT, 1956
With a view to implement International Convention signed at New York on the 9 th

May, 1950, “ the suppression of immoral traffic in woman and girls bill, 1950 ” was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on the 20 th December, 1954, by the then Minister K.N.
Katju.
In 1950 the Government of India ratified an International Convention for the

Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution
of others. Under Article 23 of the Convention, traffic in human beings is prohibited
and any contravention of the prohibition is an offence punishable by law. Under
Article 35 such a law has to be passed by Parliament as soon as may be after the
commencement of the Constitution.
Legislation on the subject of suppression of immoral traffic does exist in a few States
but the laws are neither uniform nor do they go far enough. In the remaining States
there is no bar on the subject at all. In the circumstances it is necessary and desirable
that a Central law should be passed which will not only secure uniformity but also
would be sufficiently deterrent for the purpose. But a special feature of the Bill is that
it provides that no person or authority other than the State Government shall
establish or maintain any protective home except under a license issued by the State
Government. This will check the establishment of homes which are really dens for
prostitution63
The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2006 amends the Immoral
Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 to combat trafficking and sexual exploitation for
commercial purposes. The Bill deletes provisions that analyze prostitutes for
soliciting clients. It analyzes any person visiting a brothel for the purpose of sexual
exploitation of trafficked victims. All offences listed in the Bill would be tried in
camera, i.e., the public would be excluded from attending the trial. While prostitution
is not an offence, practicing it in a brothel or within 200 m of any public place is
illegal. There seems to be a lack of clarity on whether prostitution ought to be a
legitimate way of earning a living if entered into by choice. Penalizing clients who
visit prostitutes could drive this sector underground, preventing legal channels of
support to victims of trafficking. This Bill punishes trafficking for the purpose of
prostitution. Trafficking for other purposes (such as bonded labor and domestic
work) is not covered by the Bill. The Bill aims to combat trafficking in persons for
sexual exploitation. It does not prohibit prostitution. It addresses the issue of
trafficking through both supply side (by measures to punish traffickers) and demand
side (penalties for clients) mechanisms. There are three issues that need to be
considered. First, whether prostitution ought to be a legitimate way of earning a living
if the person enters or stays in the profession out of choice. Second, whether the
demand side mechanism of punishing clients would be the best way to tackle
trafficking. Third, whether trafficking in persons for purposes other than sexual
exploitation would be analyzes. These issues are discussed below. 64
7.1 Legality of prostitution:
The Bill defines “prostitution” as sexual exploitation or abuse of persons for

commercial purposes and a “brothel” as any house or place which is used for
63
http://socialwelfare.delhigovt.nic.in/immoraltraffact1.htm,
64
www.indiatogether.org/2006/oct/law-immoral.htm,
purposes of sexual exploitation for the gain of another person or for the mutual gain
of two or more prostitutes. Although the Bill does not analyze an individual if he is in
prostitution for his own profit, it analyzes prostitution if carried on in a brothel or
from any public place within 200 meters of an educational institution, place of
religious worship, hotel, hospital, nursing home or any public place notified by the
Commissioner of Police or Magistrate. Such clauses, while technically not prohibiting
prostitution, make it almost impossible for a person to operate as a prostitute. Thus,
the Bill lacks clarity on whether prostitution ought to be a legitimate way of earning a
living if the person enters or stays in the profession out of choice. 65
7.2 Punishing Clients:
The Bill seeks to analyze any person who visits a brothel for the purpose of sexual
exploitation of a trafficked victim. The issues that arise out of such a provision are as
follows. It would be difficult for a person visiting a brothel to distinguish between a
trafficked person and a non-trafficked person. A person is analyzes only if he sexually
exploits a trafficked victim. If the victim is not trafficked, the client would not be
analyzes. Any person visiting or found in a brothel can be analyzes if the purpose of
the visit is sexual exploitation of a trafficked victim. However, as the term ‘sexual
exploitation’ is not defined in the Bill, it could lead to harassment of every person
who visits a brothel irrespective of the object of his visit. International experience
suggests that the provision to analyze clients may not be an effective way to curb
sexual exploitation. For example, Sweden views prostitution as an aspect of male
violence against women and children and analyzes the act of purchasing sexual
services. There is a view that this provision has moved the trade underground.
7.3 Trafficking Limited To Prostitution:
India is a signatory to the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking

in Persons Especially Women and Children, supplementing the UN Convention
65
Ibid
against Transnational Organized Crime. This Protocol defines ‘trafficking in persons’
as ‘the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by
means of the threat or use of force’. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the
exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced
labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of
organs.” 66
8. STATISTICS
2006 –2008
There has been a significant rise in kidnapping cases owing to the rising prosperity
together with inadequate law enforcement. In 2006, the latest period for which data is
available, the number of reported abductions jumped 52 percent to 23,991, from
15,750 in 2005, ranking India sixth among 10 countries with the worst record for
kidnappings, according to the National Crime Records Bureau. Uttar Pradesh
recorded the highest number of kidnappings at 3,318 in 2006, followed by Bihar and
Andhra Pradesh at 2,619 and 2,030, respectively. The rise in kidnapping incidents
comes at a time when domestic and overseas companies are expanding in the
hinterland, where the law enforcement machinery is often not able to provide
adequate protection to their employees. Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh
and Chhattisgarh (997) have accounted for 24.8, 15.4, 12.0 and 6.7 per cent of total
crimes respectively against children at the national level.
Procuration of Minor Girls (Sec. 366A IPC) 205 cases were reported in the year 2008
as compared to 145 such cases in 2007, accounting for 29.3% increase over 2007.
Andhra Pradesh has reported 48 such cases indicating a share of 33.1 percent at
national level. In absolute numbers, these cases registered a fall to 48 against 60 in
2007 in case of Andhra Pradesh and 9 in 2008 from 32 in 2007 in Uttaranchal. A
minor increase of 0.1 per cent was noticed in Kerala (20 cases in 2007 increased to 21
66
www.indiatogether.org/2006/oct/law-immoral.htm,
cases in 2008). 28 cases of ‘Buying of girls’ and 50 cases of ‘Selling of girls’ for
Prostitution were reported in the country during 2007 against 21 and 19 such cases
respectively in 2008. Andhra Pradesh & Delhi with 32.1% each along with
Maharashtra 21.4 accounted for 85.6% (24 cases) of total cases of ‘Buying of Girls’
and West Bengal has accounted for 88.0% (44 cases) of the total cases of ‘Selling of
Girls’ for Prostitution reported in the country. Incidence of kidnapping and
abduction of women and girls recorded an increase of 9.4% from 2004 to 2008. 67
There has been a significant rise in kidnapping cases owing to the rising prosperity
together with inadequate law enforcement. In 2006, the number of reported
abductions jumped 52 percent to 23,991, from 15,750 in 2005, ranking India sixth
among 10 countries with the worst record for kidnappings, according to the National
Crime Records Bureau.
2009-2011
The following table can be taken into account to understand the level of crime of
kidnapping and abduction in India during the period of 2008-2011 in all India level,
and in states of Haryana, Punjab and Union Territory of Chandigarh.
State and Year 2009 2010 2011

Haryana 916 963 959
Punjab 692 789 681
Chandigarh 40 38 58
India 33860 38440 44664
In 2011 total no. of cases under Indian Penal Code relating to offence of Kidnapping
and abduction were 44664 which amounted to 1.9 percent of total crimes under
Indian Penal Code. Out of these in 2011, Kidnapping and abduction of women and
girls amounted to 35565 which was 1.5 percent of total no. of crimes in Indian Penal
Code. Rate of crime was 3.7 percent for kidnapping and abduction whereas
67
http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2007/cii-2007/CHAP6.pdf,
chargesheeting rate and convictional rate was 70.5 percent and 27.3 percent
respectively.68
Further the following table can be very helpful in understanding and comparing the
data of states of Haryana, Punjab and Chandigarh regarding Kidnapping and
Abduction during the year of 201169:
State/U Cases No. of Cases Cases Total Cases Cases Cases
T Repor cases not declar cases convic acquitt pendi
ted withdraw investiga ed where ted ed and ng
during n by the ted or in false chargsh dischar Trial
the govt. which on eet laid ged at the
year during investiga accou and end
Investiga tion was nt of final of
tion refused mista report year
ke of submitt
fact ed
or
law
Haryana 959 0 0 300 625 432 72 360
Punjab 681 0 0 174 376 60 176 1357
Chandig 58 0 0 15 32 10 14 50
arh
India 44664 197 192 966 32388 4001 10680 9507
4
68
http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/cii-2011/figure%20at%20a%20glance.pdf and
http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2007/cii-2007/CHAP6.pdf
69
http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/Additional%20table%20cii%202011/Cases%20registered%20and
%20their%20disposal%20under%20IPC%20crimes%20during%20-%202011%20final.xls
CONCLUSION
Essential to combating trafficking of children is the co-operation between the legal
systems, the government bodies and the non-government bodies around the globe.
The passing of deterrent laws for the trafficker, as opposed to the victim is a step
towards reducing the occurrence of trafficking in children, however one must bear in
mind that the criminal mind will always find its ways to circumvent the laws passed.
Most societies are plagued by the malady of child trafficking, making it today a
“global phenomenon” yet it remains somewhat “unknown”. The exact magnitude of
the offence is not represented in terms of data and statistics and the exact modes of
perpetration are still oblivion. There is lack of awareness amongst citizens – possibly
due to the chauvinism of state authorities to disclose ills that affect national dignity
and recklessness.
Co-operation amongst countries need to be fostered to counter this phenomenon,

for instance by uniformity in penal provisions between countries which would be a
welcome consideration to reciprocal enforcement of protection and prevention in
trafficking which is mainly a “cross-border” crime. This uniformity can be achieved
through ratification of international instruments and national implementation of
these international humanitarian instruments relating to trafficking of children.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS REFERRED:
1. Gandhi B.M, “Indian Penal Code”, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 2nd
Edition, 2006.
2. DhirajLal Ratanlal, “Indian Penal Code”, LexisNexis Butterworth’s Wadhwa,
Nagpur, 13th Edition (Reprint 2004 Edition), 2008.
3. Singh K.K and Bagga R., “Indian Penal Code”, The Law Book Company,
Allahabad, 2nd edition, 1994
4. Mishra S.N., “Indian Penal Code”, Central Law Publications, Allahabad,14th
Edition. 2006.
5. Basu N.D., “Commentary on Indian Penal Code” ed. 10th, vol. 2, Ashoka Law
House, New Delhi, 2007
6. Sarvaria SK, “RA Nelson’s Indian Penal Code” ed. 9 th , Vol. 3, LexisNexis
Butterworths Publications, New Delhi
7. Walker, “Oxford Companion to Law”, Oxford Publications, New Delhi, 20 th
Edition, 1980,
Articles Referred:
1. Puan Sri Datin Seri N. Saraswathy Devi, ‘Child Trafficking :The Recent
emergence of the global issue”
2. Van Bueren ,“The International Law on the Rights of a Child,” Kluwer 1989
ONLINE SOURCES:
1. http://www.man.org.np/mdcampus/ppt/17-Kidnapping%20and%20extortion-
Ranendra%20Man.ppt.
2. http://www.indiatogether.org/2006/oct/law-immoral.htm.
3. http://socialwelfare.delhigovt.nic.in/immoraltraffact1.htm.
4. http://www.manupatra.com.
5. http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/IndianPenalCode/S366B.htm.
6. http://www.ewla.org/wf_dl/paper_Devi.doc.
7. http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2007/cii-2007/CHAP6.pdf.
8. http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/Additional%20table%20cii%202011/Cases
%20registered%20and%20their%20disposal%20under%20IPC%20crimes
%20during%20-%202011%20final.xls
9. http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2007/cii-2007/CHAP6.pdf
10. http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/cii-2011/figure%20at%20a%20glance.pdf
Other References:
1. Gazette of India, dated February 10, 1923, Part V
2. Black’s law Dictionary

IPC, Kidnappping and Abduction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IPC, Kidnappping and Abduction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kidnapping and Abduction

4. Difference between kidnapping and abduction 11

5. Aggravated forms of kidnapping and abduction 12

6. Slavery and Forced Labour 32

7. The Immoral Traffic (prevention) Act, 1956 33

INDIAN PENAL CODE PROJECT SUBMISSION Page 1

However some sociologists, perceiving crime as a social phenomenon feel that

· Blackstone defined crime as an act committed or omitted in violation of a public

IV. Fundamental Elements Of Crime: There are four elements which go to constitute

Injury- The fourth requirement of a crime is injury to another person or to the

1. Intention- Intention is the first stage in the commission of an offence and known

2. Preparation- Preparation is the second stage in the commission of a crime. It

Preparation When Punishable- Generally, preparation to commit any offence is not

· Preparation to commit depredation on territories of a power at peace with

· Preparation to commit dacoity- Section 399, IPC 1860;

· Preparation for counterfeiting of coins or Government stamps- Sections 233-235, S.

· Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged documents.

3. Attempt- Attempt is the direct movement towards the commission of a crime after

· Guilty intention to commit an offence;

· Some act done towards the commission of the offence;

· The act must fall short of the completed offence.

· Secondly, attempts to commit offences and commission of specific offences have

· Thirdly, attempt to commit suicide is punished under section 309;

4. Accomplishment Or Completion- The last stage in the commission of an offence

(a) It consists of three words, namely :

(b) Out of these three, the key word is "code".

Codification is a process which consists of compilation arrangement, systemisation

(i) Code of Menu

Codification - its advantages

● established an All India Legislature namely Governor General in

● provided for the appointment of a Law Commission.

3. I.P.C. its nature

It is a codifying statute. It contains the general law of crimes in India. It is a

4. Scheme of the Code

(a) The Code is broadly divided into twenty-three Chapters.

(c) Each Chapter is again sub-divided into several Sections.

(i) General Principles and

(d) Specific offences

Chapter VI to - Offences against the State and the public

(a) IPC has two kinds of jurisdiction, namely,

(c) If an Indian commits an act of commission or omission outside India, which

Note : (i In this context, reference may be made to Sec.188 of the Criminal

(a) Section 359 to Section 369 IPC = 11 sections

(i) Section 359 - two kinds of kidnapping, namely

3. Kidnapping from India

(a) Definition - Section 360 IPC

A took "W" a woman, from India to Ceylon, on the representation that

4. Kidnapping from Lawful Guardianship

(a) Definition - Section 361 IPC

(i) Taking or enticing away

(d) Explanatory Notes -

(i) Kidnapping literally means "child - stealing"

(i) Compelling by force

1.1 Child Abduction

1.3. Ten Conditions, Of Kidnapping In IPC:

2.2 Section 360:

2.3 Section 361:

2.4 Section 363:

As expand kidnapping, abduction is also a crime under Indian Penal Code it is

3.1 Section 362:

1. ‘Kidnapping’ is committed only in respect of a minor under sixteen years of

5.1 . Section 363A.