UNIT 10 THEFT, CHEATING AND

EXTORTION

Structure
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Objectives
10.3 Theft
10.3.1 Definition
10.3.2 Essential Elements of Theft
10.3.3 Punishment for Theft
10.4 Extortion
10.4.1 Definition
10.4.2 Ingredients
10.4.3 Punishment for Extortion

10.5 Cheating
10.6 Summary
10.7 Terminal Questions
10.8 Answers and Hints
10.9 References and Suggested Readings

10.1 INTRODUCTION
Chapter xvrr of Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with offences against property.
According to Indian Penal Code, the Offences Against Property can be categorised
in several types as well as conditions. Some of the major categories of Offences
Against Property are theft, extortion, robbery, dacoity, criminal misappropriation
of property, criminal breach of trust, cheating, mischief and criminal trespass.
Offences against property have been created to protect the private right of the
individuals to his property so that it may not be trespassed. These rights are
enacted by the local laws of any country. Property includes both movable and
immovable property. Our Indian Penal Code also enacted effective provisions to
protect the private property of the individuals.

Movable property can be transferred or destroyed either with or without consent.

Where movable property is taken away from a person without his consent it is
called theft and if a person intentionally puts any person in any kind of fear or
make injury to that person in order to take any property without the consent of
the owner of the property it is included in the act of Extortion. Where property is
obtained fraudulently or dishonestly by inducing any person, it is termed as
cheating. If we compare theft, extortion and cheating, we will find that in all
three offences object is the same but mode of taking property is different. Under
English law all three have been confined within the definition of larceny. In this
Unit we will mainly discuss provisions relating to theft, extortion and cheating
as given in Indian Penal Code.

17

I
Offences Against Person
and Property 10.2 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit, you should be able to:
• discuss types of crime against property;
• describe the meaning of theft, extortion and cheating;
• analyse essential elements of theft, extortion and cheating;
• distinguish between theft and extortion;
• explain penalty provisions for these offences; and
• analyse the procedure regarding these offences.

10.3 THEFT
Sections 378-382 of IPe deal with the offence of theft.

10.3.1 Definition
Section 378 defines Theft-"Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any
movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's
consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft."

There are five explanations appended to the definition oftheft as given hereunder-

Explanation I-A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being movable
property, is not the subject of theft; but it becomes capable of being the subject
of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.

Explanation 2-A moving effected by the same act which effects the severance
may be a theft.

Explanation 3-A person is said to cause a thing to move by-removing an obstacle

which prevented it from moving or by separating it from any other thing, as well
as by actually moving it.

Explanation 4-A person, who by any means causes an animal to move, is said
to move that animal, and to move everything which, in consequence ofthe motion
so caused, is moved by that animal.

Explanation 5-The consent mentioned in the definition may be express or

implied, and may be given either by the person in possession, or by any person
having for that purpose authority either express or implied.

Illustrations appended to the Section are-

a) A cuts down a tree on Z's ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking
the tree out of Z's possession without Z's consent. Here, as soon as A has
severed the tree in order to such taking, he has committed theft.

b) A puts a bait for dogs in his pocket, and thus induces Z's dog to follow it.
Here, if !\s intention be dishonestly to take the dog out of Z's possession
without Z's consent, A has committed theft as soon as Z's dog has begun to
follow A.

[8
 ~

c) A meets a bullock carrying a box of treasure. He drives the bullock in a Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
certain direction, in order that he may dishonestly take the treasure. As soon
as the bullock begins to move, A has committed theft of the treasure.

d) A being Z's servant, and entrusted by Z with the care ofZ's plate, dishonestly
runs away with the plate, without Z's consent. A has committed theft.

e) Z, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of a warehouse, till

Z shall return. A carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it. Here the plate
was not in Z's possession. It could not therefore be taken out of Z's
possession, and A has not committed theft, though he may have committed
criminal breach of trust.

f) A finds a ring belonging to Z on a table in the house which Z occupies. Here

the ring is in Z's possession, and if A dishonestly removes it, A commits
theft.

g) A finds a ring lying on the high-road, not in the possession of any person. A,
by taking it, commits no theft, though he may commit criminal
misappropriation of property.

h) A sees a ring belonging to Z lying on a table in Z's house. Not venturing to

misappropriate the ring immediately for fear of search and detection, A hides
the ring in a place where it is highly improbable that it will ever be found by
Z, with the intention of taking the ring from the hiding place and selling it
when the loss is forgotten. Here A, at the time of first moving the ring,
commits theft.

i) A delivers his watch to Z, a jeweller, to be regulated. Z carries it to his shop.

A, not owing to the jeweller any debt for which the jeweller might lawfully
detain the watch as a security, enters the shop openly, takes his watch by .
force out of Z's hand, and carries it away. Here A, though he may have
committed criminal trespass and assault, has not committed theft, inasmuch
as what he did was not done dishonestly.

j) If A owes money to Z for repairing the watch, and if Z retains the watch
lawfully as a security for the debt, and A takes the watch out of Z' s possession,
with the intention of depriving Z of the property as a security for his debt,
he commits theft, inasmuch as he takes it dishonestly.

k) Again, if A, having pawned his watch to Z, takes it out of Z's possession

without Z's consent, not having paid what he borrowed on the watch, he
commits theft, though the watch is his own property in as much as he takes
it dishonestly.

1) A takes an article belonging to Z out of Z's possession without Z's consent,

with the intention of keeping it until he obtains money from Z asa reward
for its restoration. Here A takes dishonestly; A has therefore committed theft.

m) A, being on friendly terms with Z, goes into Z's library in Z's absence, and
takes away a book without Z's express consent for the purpose merely of
reading it, and with the intention of returning it. Here, it is probable that A
may have conceived that he had Z's implied consent to use Z's book. If this
was A's impression, A has not committed theft.

19

I
Offences Against Person n) A asks charity from Z's wife. She gives A money, food and clothes, which A
and Property
knows to belong to Z her husband. Here it is probable that A may conceive
that Z's wife is authorized to give away alms. If this was I\s impression, A
has not committed theft.

0) A is the paramour of Z's wife. She gives a valuable property, which A knows
to belong to her husband Z, and to be such property as she has not authority
from Z to give. If A takes the property dishonestly, he commits theft.

p) A, in good faith, believing property belonging to Z to be I\s own property,

takes that property out of B's possession. Here, as A does not take dishonestly, I

he does not commit theft. ~

These illustrations are self explanatory and describe what acts amounts to
theft and what not.

10.3.2 Essential Elements of Theft

The following are essential requirements of theft-

1) Dishonest intention to take property

2) The property must be movable

3) The property should be taken out of the possession of another person

4) The property should be taken without the consent of that person

5) There must be some moving of property in order to accomplish the taking

of it

Dishonest Intention to Take Property

Intention is the gist of the offence. It is the intention of the taker which must
determine whether the taking or moving of a thing is theft. The intention to take
dishonestly exists when the taker intends to cause wrongful gain to one person
or wrongful loss to another person. Where there is no proof of taking of the
property found in the possession of the accused the offence committed is not
theft but criminal misappropriation.

Illustrations

1) Where a postal clerk who was in charge of receiving parcels and other mail
was accused of having committed theft of a parcel of imitation stones, it
was held that as the accused had got the parcel by lawful means and there
was no taking he could not be convicted of theft.

2) Where the complainant's (ex-student's) bag was removed from him and
handed over to the Principal by another student and suspecting that the bag
might contain some objectionable leaflets, the Principal informed the
complainant's father that the bag was in his possession but instead of
returning the bag to the complainant, it was handed over to the police station,
it was held that there was no dishonest intention in refusing to return it and
the entire proceedings were liable to be quashed.

20
Property must be Movable Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
Movable property is defined in Section 22 IPc. I Explanations 1 and 22 appended
with the Section 378 state that things attached to the land my become movable
property by severance from the earth and that the act of severance may itself be
theft [see illustration (a) given under Section 378]. Thus a thief who severs and
carries away property is put in exactly the same position as if he carried away
what had previously been severed. A sale of trees belonging to other and not cut
down at the time of sale does not constitute theft.

Property must be moved out of the possession:

The law, to some extent regards the possessor as being the owner, the proprietor
as against third parties unless they have a better right to possess than he has. In
other words the law protects the possessor against wrong doers as though
possessor were the owner. It is an essential ingredient of the offence of "theft"
that the movable propeny which was the subject matter of the theft should have
been moved out of the possession of any person without his consent. "In theft, as
it is hereby defined, the object of the offender always is to take property which is
in possession of a person out of that person's possession. The code does not
admit a single exception to this rule.

It is an essential ingredient of the offence of theft that the movable property

should have been moved out of the possession of any person without his consent.
That can be possible only if the person moving the property had taken it out of
the possession of the person concerned and transferred it to his own possession
in order to move it for the purpose of taking it dishonestly. The transfer of
possession of the property, however transient is an essential ingredient of an
offence of theft.

The property must be in the possession 01 the prosecutor. Thus, there can be no
theft of wild animals, birds or fish whi le at large but there can be a theft of tamed
animals. Similarly, where property dishonestly taken belonged to a person who
was dead, and therefore in nobody's possession or where it is lost property without
any apparent possessor it is not the subject of theft but of criminal
misappropriation [see illustration (g)].

Other Examples

i) Where the owner of bullocks had lost them and could not find them on
search and the bullocks were found in the possession of the accused, it was
held that they could not be convicted of theft but of criminal
misappropriation.
ii) Where the accused removed some bricks from a heap which had been left
lying for eight years. an assumption could be made that the bricks had been
abandoned and their removal under the circumstances did not constitute
theft. 3

I The words 'movable property' are intended to include corporeal property of every description
except land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything which is
attached to the earth.
2 Explanation J-A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being movable property, is not
the subject of theft; but it becomes capable of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed
from the earth.
Explanation 2 -Amoving effected by the same act which effects the severance may be a theft.
3 Taki Tumi, AIR 1925Ran1l3 21

I
Offences Against Person
and Property
iii) The appellant was convicted of having cut away and removed branches of a
tree belonging to the complainant. The complainant however failed to prove
ownership of the land over which the tree stood nor could he explain his
delay in filing the complaint. In these circumstances the court refused to
uphold that it was a case of theft and quashed the order of conviction."

Moving of property must be without consent

The thing stolen must have been taken without the consent of the person in possession
of it. The primary inquiry to be made is whether the taking was without the will or
approbation of the owner. Hence, where a debtor gave certain property to his creditor,
and subsequently found out that the debt was time barred it was held that the charge
of theft could not be sustained against the creditor,inasmuch as there was full unqualified
consent on the part of the debtor at the time of his giving away the property. Explanation
5 says that consent "may be express or implied and may be given either by the person
in possession or by any person having for that purpose authority either express or
implied" [see illustrations (m) and (n)]. But consent given under improper
circumstances will be of no avail [see illustration (0)]. Where consent is given under
a misconception of fact and the person removing the property knows that the consent
was given in consequence of such misconception it is not a valid consent. Consent
obtained by a false representation which leads to a misconception of facts will not be
a valid consent under the Penal Code. If the consent is obtained by deceit the accused
may be liable for any other offence but cannot be held guilty of theft. 5

Moves that property in order to such taking

The offence of theft is completed when there is a dishonest moving of the property,
even though the property is not detached from that to which it is secured. The
least removal of the thing taken from the place where it was before, is a sufficient
exportation though it be not quite carried off. It is not necessary that the property
should have been removed out of its owner's reach or carried away from the
place in which it was found. [See explanations 3&4 and illustrations (b) &(c)J

Examples

i) A, who having taken of the sheets from his bed with intent to steal them
carried them into the hall and was apprehended before he could get out of
the house was adjudged guilty of larceny.

ii) A, who having taken a horse in a close with intent to steal and was
apprehended before he could get it out of the close was held guilty of theft.

iii) A, who intending to steal plate, took it out of the trunk wherein it was, and
laid it on the floor but was surprised before he could remove it any further,
was guilty of theft.

iv) Pulling wool from the bodies of live sheep and lambs amounts to theft
under Section 378.

4 Panchanan v. Sanatan Bank, 1986 (1) Crimes 456

Janak Yadav, 1960 Cri LJ1646 (Pat)
22
 Theft, Cheating and
Self Assessment Questions Extortion

1) A, intending to commit theft enters the house ofB at night and removes
from one of the rooms a heavy box to the courtyard where he opens it.
He does not find in the box anything worth taking and leaving it there,
goes away. What offence A has committed?

2) A, at a railway station inserts counterfeit coins into an automatic machine

and causes it to eject railway tickets which A and his friends make use
of. What offence A has committed?

10.3.3 Punishment for Theft

Section 379 provides punishment for theft simpliciter and not in its aggravated
form. Section says that-

"Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment of either

description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with
both."

Section 380 deals with theft in dwelling house, etc.

"Whoever commits theft in any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or
vessel is used as a human dwelling, or used for the custody of property, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."

The object of the Section is to give greater security only to property deposited in
a house so as to be under the protection of the house and not to property about
the person of the party from whom it is stolen. Theft from a person in a dwelling
house is, therefore, simple theft under Section 379.
23

I
Offences Against Person Example
and Property
Where letters addressed to the complainant are taken away without consent by
the accused from the possession of the complainant, the requirements of Section
380 are satisfied and it is of no significance that both parties were resident in the
same house."

Section 381 deals with theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of

master-

"Whoever, being a clerk or servant, or being employed in the capacity of a clerk

or servant, commits theft in respect of any property in the possession of his
master or employer, 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 381 provides for a severe punishment when a clerk or a servant has
committed theft because he has greater opportunities of committing this offence
owing to the confidence reposed in him. When the possession is with the master
this Section applies; when it is with the servant Section 408 comes into operation.

Clerk or Servant: A clerk or servant is a person bound either by an express

contract of service or by conduct implying such a contract to obey the orders and
submit to the control of his master in the transaction of the business which it is
his duty as such clerk or servant to transact.

What is a test as to the relationship of master and servant? A test used in many
cases is, to ascertain whether the prisoner was bound to obey the orders of his
employer so as to be under his employer's it is not necessary that there should be
a payment by salary for commission will do nor that the whole time should be
employed nor that the employment should be permanent, - for it may be only
occasional, or in a single instance - if, at the time, the prisoner is engaged as a
servant."

"The test is whether the person charged is under the control and bound to obey
the orders of his master. He may be so without being bound to devote his whole
time to this service; but if bound to devote his whole time to it, that would be
very strong evidence of his being under control." In other words, to decide the
question whether or not there is relationship of master and servant one has to see
the degree and control exercised by the former and the nature of duties to be
performed by the latter. The allowance of a portion of the profits or goods does
not destroy the relation of master and servant. It is necessary that the objects of
the service of a 'clerk or servant' should not be criminal but a man may be such
a clerk or servant although the objects of his service are in part illegal as being
contrary to public policy."

CASES

Clerk-Where the clerk of a toll-contractor illegally levied toll on carts laden

when leaving a town, and prevented the carts from passing through the toll-gate,
unless the toll demanded was paid, he was held guilty of this offence.

Servant-Where some policemen stole a sum of money shut up in a box and

placed in the Policy Treasury building, over which they were mounting guard as
6 Gopal Chauhan v. Satya, 1979 ell LJ 446 (HP)
24
 sentinels, they were held guilty of an offence under this Section and not under Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
Section 409. Where a person engaged to cart tamarind fruit from a forest abstracted
a portion of it, it was held that he was not the less a servant because his
employment was temporary. But a hired boatman is not a servant, though an
unpaid apprentice is.

Section 382 deals with theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt
or restraint in order to the committing of the theft

"Whoever commits theft, having made preparation for causing death, or hurt, or
restraint, or fear of death, or of hurt, or of restraint, to any person, in order to the
committing of such theft, or in order to the effecting of his escape after the
. committing of such theft or in order

to the retaining of property taken by such theft, shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable
to fine."

Illustrations
a) A commits theft on property in Z's possession; and, while committing this
theft, he has a loaded pistol under his garment, having provided this pistol
for the purpose of hurting Z in case Z should resist. A has committed the
offence defined in this Section.

b) A picks Z's pocket, having posted several of his companions near him, in
order that they may restrain Z, if Z should perceive what is passing and
should resist, or should attempt to apprehend A. A has committed the offence
defined in this Section.

Scope

This Section also deals with an aggravated form of theft. Whereas in the previous
Section, aggravation consisted in abuse of trust and confidence because of
relationship, in the present Section it consists in preparation of causing death,
hurt or I restraint.

The possession by a thief at the time of his committing a theft of a knife or other
weapon, which, if used on a human being, might cause death or hurt, would not
of itself justify a conviction under the Section. There must be something to show
or from which it may properly be inferred, that the offender made preparation
for causing one or more of the results mentioned in the Section.

Self Assessment Questions

3) A gives a piece of cloth to B, a tailor for making a suit for him. On
demand B refuses to hand over the stitched suit unless A paid the stiching
charges. A looks for the opportunity and takes away his suit without the
knowledge of B and without paying money. Here what offence is
committed by A?

25

I
Offences Against Person
and Property 4) A, Band C surround D in such a way as to make resistance on the part of
D useless and then A takes away the-watch of D without the use of force ','

or threat. Whether A, Band C will be guilty of theft?

10.4 EXTORTION
Section 383 IPC defines "extortion" while Section 384 provides punishment for
the offence. The offence of extortion occupies a middle place between theft and
robbery.

10.4.1 Definition
Section 383, defines extortion as-Whoever intentionally puts' any person in
fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces
the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property, or valuable security
or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security,
commits "extortion".

Illustrations

a) A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning Z unless Z gives him

money. He thus induces Z to give him money. A has committed extortion.
b) A threatens Z that he will keep Z's child in wrongful confinement, unless Z
will sign and deliver to A a promissory note binding Z to pay certain monies
to A to Z sings and delivers the note. A has committed extortion.
c) A threatens to send club-men to plough up Z's field unless Z will sign and
deliver to B a bond binding Z under a penalty to deliver certain produce to
B, and thereby induces Z to sign and deliver the bond. A has committed
extortion.
d) A, by putting Z in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces Z to sign or
affix his seal to a blank paper and deliver it to A. Z sings and delivers the
paper to A. Here, as the paper so signed may be converted into a valuable
security A has committed extortion.

10.4.2 Ingredients
The ingredients of extortion are:
1) The accused must put any person in fear of injury to that person or any other
person.

2) The putting of a person in such fear must be intentional

3) The accused must thereby induce the person so put in fear to deliver to any
.person any property, valuable security or anything signed or sealed which
26 may be converted into a valuable security.
4) Such inducement must be done dishonestly. Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
'Puts any person in fear of injury'
The injury may be intended to the person put in fear, or to any other. It is not
necessary that any relationship must exist between that person and the person
put in fear. The word 'injury' is defined in Section 44 IPC.7 The injury
contemplated must be one which the accused himself can inflict or cause to be
inflicted, and a threat of divine punishment is not such. No injury can be caused
or threatened to be caused unless the act done is either an offence or such as may
properly be made the basis of a civil action.

Thus, before a person can be said to put any person in fear of any injury to that
person it must appear that he has held out some threat to do or omit to do what he
is legally bound to do in future. If all that a man does is to promise to do a thing
which he is not legally bound to do and says that if money is not paid to him he
would not do that thing such act would not amount to an offence of extortion. 8 It
is quite conceivable that a public servant may commit extortion by compelling a
person put in fear to part with property.

If a person voluntarily delivers any property without there being any fear of
injury, extortion cannot be said to have been committed. Even the illustrations
under Section 383 reveal that the delivery must be pursuant to threat of injury to
reputation; to the body or to the body of another person.

Extortion as defined in Section 383 includes putting any person in fear of injury
and covers Section 385, which is a less serious offence punishable with two
years, imprisonment as against three years' imprisonment for offence under
Section 384.

The Law Commissioners observed that: "We conceive that it will be a question
for the Court whether the injury threatened was such as was likelyto produce the
effect Intended, and whether under the circumstances the party was really put in
fear, believing the injury to be inevitable if he did not comply."?

Circumstances
The age, sex and situation of the person threatened may properly be taken into
consideration. To constitute the offence it seems necessary that the person
threatened should be actually put In fear; upon the whole of facts, if there is
reason enough to say that similar circumstances would ordinarily excite fear in
persons of the same age, etc., as the person threatened, the Court will come to
the conclusion that the offence of extortion is committed.
The 'fear' must be of such a nature and extent as to unsettle the mind of the
person on whom it operates, and takes away from his acts that element of free,
voluntary action which alone constitutes consent. Where the threats are not
necessarily of a character to excite such alarm, it becomes a question for the
injury whether they were made under such circumstances of intimidation as to
have that effect.'? Thus, in the case of Nathlie Miard' threatening to expose a

7 Section 44 "lnjury"- The word "injury" denotes any harm whatever illegally caused to any
person, in body, mind, reputation or property.
8 R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antuley & Others, 1986 Cri LJ 1922 (SC)
9 First Report, Section 417, p. 306
10 Walton, (1863) 9 Cox 268
11 (1844) 1 Cox 22 27
I.

I
Offences Against Person clergyman, who had had criminal intercourse with a woman in a house of ill-
and Property
fame, in his own church and village, to his own bishop, and to the archbishop,
and also to publish his shame in the newspaper was held to be such a threat as a
man of ordinary firmness could not be expected to resist.

Dishonestly induce
The element of dishonesty is the essence of extortion. The chief element in the
offence of extortion is that the inducement must be dishonest. It is not sufficient
that there should be wrongful loss caused to an individual but the person putting
that individual in fear of injury must have the intention that wrongful loss should
be caused. Where the accused honestly believed that the complainant had taken
the money belonging to him (the accused), an attempt to get it back cannot be
said to be with the intention of causing wrongful loss to him.

Delivery of property
where a person through fear offers no resistance to the carrying off of his property,
but does not deliver any of the property to those who carry it off, the offence
committed is robbery and not extortion. The essence of the offence of extortion
lies in the actual delivery of possession of the property by the person put in fear
and the offence is not complete before such delivery", {~

An intent to extort money may be implied from circumstances, and does not
require an express demand of money. But, if it appears that the object is to compel
the delivery of accounts of moneys honestly believed to be due and owing, there
is no evidence of the intent. Where the accused forcibly removed certain property
from the possession of the complainant claiming that the same belonged to himself
and placed it in trust with a shop-keeper, and it appeared that there was some
evidence to show that the property did in fact belong to the accused it was clear
that the accused had no dishonest intention in removing the property, and no
offence under this Section was established against him.

To any person
It is not necessary that the threat should be used, and the property received, by
one and the same individual. It may be a matter of arrangement between several
persons that the threat should be used by some, and the property received by
others and they all will be guilty of extortion."

Valuable security
'Valuable security' is defined in Section 30.14 There is no distinction between an
unstamped or an unregistered document and a document executed by a minor. In
both cases the document purports to be a document whereby a legal right is
created or a person acknowledges that he lies under a legal disability. Where a
minor boy was forced to execute a hand note, it was held that it amounted to a
valuable security within the meaning of this Section read with Section 30.

12 Vishnu Shiv Ram Bhoir, AIR 1979SC1943

13 Ujagar Singh (1925) 26 Cri L J 794
14 Section 30 "Valuable security".- The words "valuable security" denote a document which is,
or purports to be, a document whereby any legal right is created, extended, transferred.
restricted, extinguished or released, or who hereby any person acknowledges that he l'e:'
28 under legal liability, or has not a certain legal right.
Illustration Theft, Cheating and
. Extortion
A writes his name on the back of a bill of exchange. As the effect of this
endorsement is to transfer the right to the bill to any person who may become the
lawful holder of it, the endorsement is a "valuable security".

The forcible taking of the victim's thumb impressions on a blank piece of paper
which can be converted into a valuable security does not necessarily involve
inducing the victim to deliver papers with the thumb impressions. Hence, where
the victim is assaulted by the accused and his thumb impression forcibly taken
upon a blank piece of paper, the offence of extortion cannot be said to have been
established. The offence is no more than the use of criminal force or an assault
punishable under Section 352.

B was abducted from Delhi and was wrongfully confined by R and his four
associates who were heavily armed. B under fear of his life wrote letters to his
father for payment of ransom amount. By virtue of the letters the abductors got a
ransom of Rs. 1,80,000. It was held that a document which enables a person or
which gives a person a reasonable hope or expectation of collecting substantial
amount of money is property. Where the suspension order of a principal was
revoked by force, the question was whether the document which was said to be
extorted was a valuable security within the meaning of Section 30. Valuable
security denotes a document which is or purports to be a document whereby any
legal right is created, extended, transferred, extinguished or released or whereby
any person acknowledges that he lies under legal liability, or has got a certain
legal right. The order revoking the suspension order extorted from certain persons
under threat and pressure is a valuable security within the meaning of Section
30.15

'Anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security'

These words denote that incomplete deeds may be the subject of extortion under
this expression. For instance, A signs his name to a blank paper or to a promissory
note in which date, sums, etc, are not filled ~p; or A having caused a deed or a
bond to be prepared, has signed and sealed it, but has not yet delivered it as his
deed, this act of delivery being that which gives gull legal effect and operation to
the instrument. In each of these cases the blank paper and the incomplete deed
are subjects of extortion.

Self Assessment Question

5) Where 'P' the prosecutor while returning home met a woman on the
way to whom he spoke. Whereupon he was accosted by a policeman on
duty who threatened to prosecute him for spoken to a prostitute on the
street for which P made himself liable to pay money. However, the
constable proposed to drop the matter if he was paid a heavy amount of
money, Which P made to him. Whether constable is liable under Section
383 of the IPe?

15 Ram Kamal Bezboruac v. Chandra Nath Kalita, 1971 Cri LJ 708 (Assam) 29

I
Offences Against Person
and Property
10.4.3 Punishment for Extortion
Section 384 provides penalty for extortion. Sections 386 and 388 also prescribe
penalties for the same offence higher than the one prescribed under this Section.

Section 384 says that whoever commits extortion shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years,
or with fine, or with both.

Section 385 seeks to punish an attempt to commit extortion, when the attempt
has failed, the offence is not complete and the property is not delivered.

Section 385 putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion

"Whoever, in order to the committing of extortion, puts any person in fear, or

attempts to put any person in fear, of any injury, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or
with fine, or with both."
-:
This Section makes distinction between inchoate and the consummated offence.
The attempt to commit extortion proceeds towards completion if a person has
been put in fear of injury or if an attempt is made to excite such fear. But offence
, remains incomplete if there is no delivery of property.

The injury contemplated must be within the power of the accused. A threat of
God that he would be punished is not such an injury. No injury can be caused or
threatened to be caused unless the act done is either an offence or such as may
properly be made the basis of civil action."

Self Assessment Question

6)" Where A on behalf of B, the accused threatened to put questions to the
complainant and to the ladies of his household (who were witnesses),
which were entirely irrelevant, scandalous and indecent with a view to
extort money, what offence has been committed by A?

-.
Aggravated Form of Extortion
Section 386 -Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous
hurt
"Whoever commits extortion by putting any person in fear of death or of grievous
hurt to that person or to any other, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine."

30 16 Misra, S.N.,lndian Penal Code, 12th ed. (2004)P.584

This Section deals with an aggravated form of extortion. Here an offence is Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
committed by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. Where the fear
caused is that of death or of grievous hurt it naturally causes great alarm. The
Section, therefore, provides for severe penalty in such cases.

Where the accused demanded ransom from the father of a boy whom they had
kidnapped and they put the father in fright of the boy being murdered and there
was throughout the likelihood of the boy being murdered, in case the ransom
money was not paid, and where the father paid the ransom money, it was held
that offence under this Section was committed.'?

Offence under Section 386 is cognizable, non bailable, non compoundable and
is to be tried by the Magistrate of the first class.

Section 387 Putting person in fear of death or of grievous hurt, in order to

commit extortion

"Whoever in order to the committing of extortion, puts or attempts to put any

person in fear of death or of grievous hurt to that person or to any other, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
. "
to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

The relation between Section 387 and Section 386 is the same as that between
Sections 385 and 384.
It is not necessary that the fear of death or of grievous hurt should be instantaneous.
Where the accused wrote a letter threatening that if the complainant wished to
save his own life and that of his child, he must pay a ransom of Rs. 10,000 the
accused was found guilty under this Section. There ought to be some visible
overt act which may reflect the natural and normal inference that the wrong doer
had, in fact, put a person in fear of death or of grievous hurt. In the absence of
any apparent overt act leading towards the act of extortion and thus putting any
person in fear of death or of grievous hurt it cannot be said to be an offence
committed for extortion by threat. Without any visible sign of physical act, simple
use of words is not enough to constitute that offence in the absence of any physical
act on the part of the petitioner and also any such material which may indicate
that, as a matter of fact, the petitioner had practised extortion by threat of fear of
death and hurt, the offence was not constituted.

Illustrations
I) if any person is confronted by any wrong doer armed with dagger or pistol
and thereafter he made some utterances demanding some rnoney, that can
be said to be an act of extortion, but in a broad day light within the hearing
of every one having some financial relationship, if demand for money is
made by uttering some threat that cannot be said to be an act of extortion as
contemplated under this Section.

2) The feigning of an attempt to commit suicide in order to extort money is an

offence under this Section.
Offence under Section 387 is cognizable, non bailable and non compoundable.
It is to be tried by Magistrate of the first class on the issuance of warrant.

17 Ramachandra, AIR 1957 se 381 31

I
Offences Against Person Section 388 deals with Extortion by threat of accusation of an offence
and Property
punishable with death or imprisonment for life, etc.
"Whoever commits extortion by putting any person in fear of an accusation against
that person or any other, of having committed or attempted to commit any offence
punishable with death, or with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for
a term which may extend to ten years, or of having attempted to induce any other
person to commit such offence, 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, if the offence be one punishable under Section 377 (relating to unnatural
offences) of this Code, may be punished with imprisonment for life."

Offence under this Section is cognizable and bailable but non compoundable. It
is to be tried by Magistrate of the first class on the issuance of warrant.

Section 389 Putting person in fear or accusation of offence, in order to commit

extortion
Whoever, in order to the committing of extortion, puts or attempts to put any
person in fear of an accusation, against that person or any other, of having
committed, or attempted to commit, an offence punishable with death or with
imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten
years, 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, if the offence be
punishable under Section 377 of this Code, may be punished with imprisonment
for life.

This Section bears the same relation to Section 388 as Section 385 bears to
Section 384. Offence under this Section is cognizable and bailable but non
compoundable. It is to be tried by Magistrate of the first class on the issuance of
warrant.

Self Assessment Question

7) Discuss aggravated form of extortion with suitable examples.

Distinction between Theft and Extortion-

1) Extortion is distinguished from theft on the basis that in extortion the consent
is obtained by putting the person in possession of property in fear of injury
to him or to any other. The offence is carried out by over-powering the will
of the owner. In extortion a person is induced to part with the property by
putting him in fear of injury. In theft the offender's intention is always to
take without that person's consent.

2) Secondly, the property which is obtained by extortion is not limited as in

theft, to movable property only. As the word 'movable' is omitted in the
32
 definition of extortion, immovable property may also be the subject of Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
extortion.

3) In theft the property is taken by the offender, whereas in extortion the property
is delivered to the offender.

10.5 CHEATING
a) Section 415 defines Cheating as -
Whoever, by deceiving any person,
a) fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any
property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property,
or

b) intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything

which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or
omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body,
mind, reputation or property or wrongful gain to any person, is said to "cheat".

Explanation- A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning

of this Section.

Illustrations appended with the Section are

a) A, by falsely pretending to be in the Civil Service, intentionally deceives Z,
and thus dishonestly induces Z to let him have on credit goods for which he
does not mean to pay. A cheats.

b) A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into

a belief that this article was made by a certain celebrated manufacturer, and
thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

c) A, by exhibiting to Z a false sample of an article intentionally deceives Z

into believing that the article corresponds with the sample, and thereby
dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

d) A, by tendering in payment for an article a bill on a house with which A

keeps no money, and by which A expects that the bill will be dishonoured,
intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to deliver the
article, intending not to pay for it. A cheats

e) A, by pledging as diamond articles which he knows are not diamonds,

intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend money.
A cheats.

f) A Intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money

that Z may lend to him and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend him money,
A not intending to repay it. A cheats.

g) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to deliver to Z a certain

quantity of indigo plant which he does not intend to deliver, and thereby
dishonestly induces Z to advance money upon the faith of such delivery. A
cheats; but if A, at the time of obtaining the money, intends to deliver the
indigo plant, and afterwards breaks his contract and does not deliver it, he
does not cheat, but is liable only to a civil action for breach of contract.
33

1
 Offences Against Person
and Property h) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A has performed A's part of a
contract made with Z, which he has not performed, and thereby dishonestly
induces Z to pay money. A cheats.

i) A sells and conveys an estate to B. A, knowing that in consequence of such

sale he has no right to the property, sells or mortgages the same to Z, without
disclosing the fact of the previous sale and conveyance to B, and receives
the purchase or mortgage money from Z. A cheats.

b) Ingredients

For the offence of cheating Section 415 requires following things-

1) Deception of any person.

2) . a) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person:

i) to deliver any property to any person, or

ii) to consent that any person shall retain any property, or

b) intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which

he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or
omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in
body, mind reputation or property.

The definition of cheating under Section 415 of IPC contains two-parts. First
comes the main, part "whoever, by deceiving any person .." words which obviously
apply to the whole Section. Then comes the first part "fraudulently, or dishonestly
induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person or to consent
that any person shall retain any property. "Then comes Part 2, which is an
alternative to sub-part 1 viz., "or intentionally induces ... mind, reputation -or
property." Then come the closing words "is said to cheat." The words "and which
act or omission ... reputation or property" form a portion of Part 2 and are not
applicable to Part 1 at all. The definition of the offence of cheating embraces
some cases in which no transfer of property is occasioned by the deception and
some in which such a transfer occurs; for these cases generally a genera] provision
is made in Section 417 of the Code. For the cases in which property is transferred
a more specific provision is made by Section 420. But in an earlier case it has
been laid down that an offence of cheating accompanied by a delivery of property
may be punished under either of the Sections; but where the case appears to be
of a serious nature steps must be taken to send it to the Court of Session for trial
under Section 420.

Every promise by a person as to his future conduct implies a statement of intention

about it. Therefore, if a person makes a false representation regarding his future
conduct and thereby obtains property from another, the misrepresentation made
by him would be of an existing state and would fall within the mischief of this
Section: see illustrations (f) and (g).

The offence of cheating is not committed if a third party, on whom no deception

has been practised, sustains pecuniary loss in consequence of the accuser's act.
As to hold a person guilty of cheating it has to be shown that his intention was
dishonest at the time of making promise. Such dishonest intention cannot be
inferred from the fact of subsequent non-fulfilment of the promise."

34 IS Ratan Lal & Dhiraj Lals Law of Crimes (Commentry), 26th Ed 2007, pp.2388-89
Cheating can also be committed in relation to immovable property. The Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
representation which must be fraudulent or dishonest and which must have
induced the person deceived to deliver property may as well be perpetrated in
relation to immovable property as to movable property.

c) Section 417 Punishment for cheating

Section 417 punishes simple cases of cheating, it says that "Whoever cheats
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to one year or with fine or with both."

Where A dines at a hotel and goes away without paying bills or leaving his name
and address, he would be liable for cheating under this Section.

Self Assessment Question

8) Where an accused secretly entered an exhibition building without having

purchased a ticket and told to the gate keeper that he had a ticket and
thus obtained his entry into the building, what offence he commits?

Cheating by personation
d) definition
"A person is said to "cheat by personation" if he cheats by pretending to be some
other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for or another, or
representing that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other
person really is."

Explanation-The offence is committed whether the individual personated is a

real or imaginary person.

Illustrations
a) A cheats, by pretending to be a certain rich banker of the same name. A
cheats by personation.

b) A cheats by pretending to be B, a person who is deceased. A cheats by

personation.
Section 416 defines the offence of cheating by personation. This is an offence of
general nature under which a person pretends to be anyone other than what he
really is. This Section requires both; (i) cheating; and (ii) personation.

e) Ingredients
This Section requires anyone of the following essentials:-
1) Pretension by a person to be some other person.
2) Knowingly substituting one person for another.
35
Offences Against Person 3) Representation that the person representing or any other person is a person
and Property
other than he or such other person really is.

To 'personate' means to pretend to be a particular person. "The giving out of a

false name amounts to personation but mere personation is not an offence under
the Penal Code. A person cannot be convicted merely because he secured
recruitment by giving out a fictitious name unless it is established that he would
not have been so recruited had he disclosed his correct name.

Similarly where the accused was charged of cheating bank A by encashing cheque
through bank B by opening account with it in a fictitious name, it was held that
since the firm in whose favour the cheque was drawn was fictitious no question
of personation by accused arose and therefore Section 419 was not attracted. As
soon as a man by word, act, or sign holds himself forth as a person entitled to
vote with the object of passing himself off as that person, and exercising the
right which that person has, he has personated him. If a person at Oxford, who is
not a member of the University, goes to a shop for the purpose of fraud, wearing
a commoner's cap and gown, and obtains goods, this appearing in a cap and
gown is a sufficient cheating although nothing passed in words.

An offence under Section 416 is complete only when a person obtains possession
of property by a trick. Thus, where one C representing himself as A deposited
certain amount with B in order to obtain allotment of cement and in the meanwhile
the genuine A also deposited amount in order to obtain allotment and as C's
identity was suspected the possession of the cement was not handed over to him,
it was held that C was entitled to benefit of doubt.

The Explanation to the Section clarifies that the person personated may be a real
or an imaginary person.

f) Section 419 Punishment for cheating by personation

Whoever cheats by personation shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with
both.

Self Assessment Question

9) A personated as B at the examination, passed the examination and
obtained the certificate in B' name, B thereupon applied to have his own
name entered in the list of candidates for government service. What
offence A and B have committed?

36
g) Section 418 Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
person whose interest offender is bound to protect

Whoever cheats with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause wrongful
loss to a person whose interest in the transaction to which the cheating relates,
he was bound either by law, or by legal contract, to protect, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three
years, or with fine, or with both.

h) Section 420 Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property

"Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver
any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of
a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable
of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also
be liable to fine."

Simple cheating is punishable under Section 417. But where there is delivery or
destruction of any property or alteration or destruction of any valuable security
resulting from the act of the person deceiving, the proper Section to apply is
Section 420 and not Section 417. Section 417 covers cases of cheating in which
though there is fraud yet there is no intention of causing wrongful loss, or wrongful
gain. The word 'fraudulently' is not used in Section 420. All deceptions do not
amount to cheating. In order to constitute cheating the deception must be with a
dishonest or fraudulent intent. Therefore, when as a result of deception the person
deceived is injured in any way or is exposed to the risks of any injury or loss
fraud may be said to have been committed.

i) Ingredients of Offence Under Section 420

The ingredients of the offence under Section 420 are not only that / the accused
has cheated someone but also that by doing so, he has dishonestly induced the /
person who was cheated to deliver property.'? The offence of cheating is made
of two / ingredients: deception of any person and fraudulently or dishonestly
inducing that person to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any
person shall retain any property. To put it differently, the ingredients of the offence
are that the person deceived delivers to someone a valuable security or property,
that the person so deceived was induced to do so, that such person acted on such
inducement in consequence of his having been deceived by the accused and that
the accused acted fraudulently or dishonestly when so inducing the persons. To
constitute the offence of cheating, it is not necessary that the deception should
be by express words, but it may be by conduct or implied in the nature of the
transaction itself." It is settled law that for establishing the offence of cheating,
the complainant is required to show that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest
intention at the time of making promise or representation. From his making
failure to keep promise subsequently, such a culpable intention right at the
beginning that is at the time when the promise was made cannot be presumed.
j) The essential ingredients to attract Section 420, IPC are:
i) cheating;

19 R. S. Nayak v. A. R. Antuley, AIR 1986 SC 2045

20 Ram Narain Popli v. CBI, (2003) 2 Crimes312 (SC) 37
 Offences Against Person
and Property ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or to make, alter or destroy ny
valuable security or anything which is sealed or signed or is capable of
being converted into a valuable security,

iii) mens rea of the accused at the time of making the inducement. The making
of a false representation is one of the ingredients for the offence of cheating
under Section 420."

k) Illustrative Cases:

i) In Poovalappil David v. State of Kerala" the petitioners were Manager and

managing partners of "Blue Diamond Theatre" which was licensed as an air
conditioned theatre. The petitioners used to switch off the air conditioning
unit after the entry of customers to save the electrical energy for illegally
enriching themselves. It was held that the action of petitioners amounts to
cheating under Section 420 of the code, because by advertising the theatre
as air conditioned one, the petitioners had dishonestly induced customers to
purchase tickets by giving higher fare to have entry in the theatre.

ii) In Ram Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar'? Where the officers of LIe
introduced fake proposals without any actual gain for themselves as well as
a real loss for corporation, they were held liable for cheating under Section
420, as such false proposals were likely to harm the reputation of corporation.
The aim of such officers was to show inflated business in their branch and
secure the promotion in future on its basis.

I) Difference Between Sections 417 and 420

The difference between Section 417 and Section 420 is that, where, in pursuance
of the deception, no property passes, the offence is one of cheating punishable
under Section 417, but where, in pursuance of the deception, property is delivered,
the offence is punishable under Section 420.23 In every case where property is
delivered by a person cheated, there must always be a stage when the person
makes up his mind to give the property on accepting the false-representation
made to him. It cannot be said that in such cases the person committing the
offence can only be tried for the simple offence of cheating under Section 417
and cannot be tried under this Section because the person cheated parts with his
property subsequent to making up his mind to do so.

The vital difference between offences under Section 417 and Section 420 is that
whereas an offence against the latter Section is a cognizable one, that against
the former is non-cognizable and investigation of it can only be undertaken by
the police on the instructions of a Magistrate, where in the other case the policy
can act on their own motion under Sections 154 and 156, Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973.

21 1989 Cri Lj 2452 (Ker)

22 AIR 1998 SC296
2.1 Tulsi Ram, (1963) 1 Cri LJ 623 (SC); See Also R. S. Nayak v. A. R. Antuley, AIR 1986 SC
2045
38
 Theft, Cheating and
Self Assessment Question Extortion

10) Mark out distinction between Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC by giving
illustrations.

m) Of fraudulent deeds and dispositions of property

Section 421 Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property to

prevent distribution among creditors
Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently removes, conceals or delivers to any person,
or transfers or causes to be transferred to any person, without adequate
consideration, any property, intending thereby to prevent, or knowing it to be
likely that he will thereby prevent the distribution of that property according to
law among his creditors or the creditors of any other person, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both.

Scope of the Section

This Section applies to property both movable and immovable". This Section is
intended to punish fraudulent debtors. It specially refers to frauds connected
with insolvency. The offence under it consists in a dishonest disposition of
property with intent to cause wrongful loss to the creditors. It is not necessary
that the transferee should be privy to the fraud; but want of bona fides on the part
of the transferee is necessary under civil law.
When a debtor with bankruptcy impending pays a creditor in the honest belief
on reasonable grounds that he is legally bound to make the payment, it is not a
fraudulent preference, even though the debtor is in fact under no legal obligation
to make the payment.
The Section covers benami transactions in fraud of creditors.

Section 422 Dishonestly or fraudulently preventing debt being available for

creditors
"Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently prevents any debt or demand due to himself
or to any other person from being made available according to law for payment
of his debts or the debts of such other person, shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both."
This Section like Section 421 is intended to prevent the defrauding of creditors
by masking property. Any proceeding to prevent the attachment and sale of debts
due to the accused will fall under it. The offence consists in the dishonest or
fraudulent evasion of one's own liability.

24 R.K. Dalmia v. Delhi Administration, (1962) 2 Cri LJ 805 (Se) 39

Offences Against Person For the applicability of Section 422 the prosecution must prove that-
and Property
i) That the debt or demand was due to the accused, or some other person

ii) That the accused prevented such debt or demand from being made legally
available for his debts or for the debts of another person

iii) That he did as above dishonestly or fraudently

Section 423 Dishonest or fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing

false statement of consideration
"Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to any
deed or instrument which purports to transfer or subject to any charge any property,
or any interest therein, and which contains any false statement relating to the
consideration for such transfer or charge, or relating to the person or persons for
whose use or benefit it is really intended to operate, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or
with fine, or with both."

Object: The Section aims to prevent two acts of fraud- i) False recital of
consideration, ii) fictitious name of the beneficiary.

One of the necessary elements under this Section is that some dishonesty or
fraud should be made out. The Section deals with fraudulent and fictitious
conveyances and trusts. If the consideration for the sale of immovable property
is with the consent of the purchaser exaggerated in a deed of sale in order to
defeat the claim of the pre-emptor, the purchaser will be guilty of this offence. In
such cases it is necessary to prove the existence of a right of pre-emption in
respect of the subject matter of such sale as it is not an offence if the property
sold is not subject to such a right.

Under this Section the dishonest execution of a benami deed will be punishable.
The institution of a civil suit is not a condition precedent to the maintenance of
a charge in a criminal court for this offence.

Under Section 423 following things need to be proved-

i) That the accused signed, executed or became a party to the deed or instrument
in question

ii) That the purport of such document was to transfer or to subject to a charge,
the property or any interest in question

iii) That such document contained a false statement relating to the consideration
or relating to the person for whose use or benefit it was really intended to
operate

iv) That the accused acted dishonestly or fraudulently.

Section 424 Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property

"Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently conceals or removes any property of himself
or any other person, or dishonestly or fraudulently assists in the concealment or
removal thereof, or dishonestly releases any demand or claim to which he is
entitled, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both."
40
Scope: This Section provides for cases not coming within the purview of Section Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
421 and 422. It contemplates such a concealment or removal of property from
the place in which it is deposited, as can be considered dishonest or fraudulent,
whether the fraud is intended to be practiced on creditors or partners.

h) Illustrations
Where one of the several partners removed the partnership books at night and
when questioned denied having done so. Where ajudgment debtor whose standing
crops were attached harvested them while the attachment was in force and where
one of the eo sharers in agricultural production removed some crops and thereby
caused a lesser share to the other. All these were held to be offence under Section
424IPe.

Procedure under Section 421,422,423 as well as under 424 is non cognizable,

bailable and compoundable only when permission is given by the court before
which the prosecution is pending. The offence is triable by any Magistrate.

Self Assessment Question

11) Describe the provisions relating to fraudulent deeds and dispositions of
property. Substantiate your answer with suitable examples.

10.6 SUMMARY
1) Chapter XVII of Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with Offences Against
Property.

2) Some of the major categories of Offences Against Property are theft,

extortion, robbery, dacoity, criminal misappropriation of property, criminal
breach of trust, cheating, mischief and criminal trespass.

3) Where movable property is taken away from a person without his consent it
is called theft. Sections 378-382 of IPC deal with the offence of theft.

4) The essential requirements of theft are- a)dishonest intention to take

property b) property must be movable c) property should be taken out of the
possession of another person d) property should be taken without the consent
of that person, and e) there must be some moving of property in order to
accomplish the taking of it.

5) Section 379 provides that whoever commits theft shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three
years, or with fine, or with both.

6) Section 380 deals with theft in dwelling house, etc.

41
Offences Against Person
and Property
7) Section 381 deals with theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of
master.

8) Section 382 deals with theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt
or restraint in order to the committing of the theft.

9) The offence of extortion occupies a middle place between theft and robbery.

10) If a person intentionally. puts any person in any kind of fear or make injury
to that person in order to take any property without the consent of the owner
of the property it is included in the act of Extortion. Sections 383-389 of
IPC deal with the offence of extortion.

11) Section 384 provides that whoever commits extortion shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.

12) Section 385 punishes attempt to commit extortion. When the attempt has
failed, the offence is not complete and the property is not delivered.

13) Section 386 deals with aggravated form of extortion, which is cognizable,
non bailable, non compoundable and is to be tried by the Magistrate of the
first class.

14) Section 387 says that whoever in order to the committing of extortion, puts
or attempts to put any person in fear of death or of grievous hurt to that
person or to any other, shall be punished with imprisonment of even years,
and also with fine. '

15) Section 388 deals with Extortion by threat of accusation of an offence

punishable with death or imprisonment for life, etc.

16) Section 389 bears the same relation to Section 388 as Section 385 bears to
Section 384. Offence under Section 389 is cognizable and bailable but non
compoundable. It is to be tried by Magistrate of the first class on the issuance
of warrant for putting the person in fear or accusation of offence, in order to
commit extortion

17) Distinction between theft and extortion-a) In extortion a person is induced

to part with the property by putting him in fear of injury. In theft the offender's
intention is always to take without that person's consent, b) In theft the
property is taken by the offender, whereas in extortion the property is
delivered to the offender, c) theft is with regard to movable property only,
whereas extortion can be with regard to immovable property also.

18) Where property is obtained fraudulently or dishonestly by inducing any

person, it is termed as cheating. Sections 415-424 of IPC deal with the
offence of extortion.

19) The offence of "cheating by personation" is committed whether the individual

personated is a real or imaginary person. (Section 416 IPC)

20) Section 417 punishes simple cases of cheating which may extend to one
year imprisonment or with fine or with both

21) Section 418 deals with cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may
ensue to person whose interest offender is bound to protect, Punishment
42
may extend to three years imprisonment, or with fine, or with both.
22) Section 419 provides punishment for cheating by personation, which may Theft, Cheating and
Extortion
extend to three years imprisonment, or with fine, or with both.

23) Where, in pursuance of the deception, property is delivered, the offence is

punishable under Section 420.

24) The vital difference between offences under Section 417 and Section 420 is
that while offence under Section 420 is a cognizable one, under Section 417
it is non-cognizable.

25) Sections 421 to 424 of IPC deal with fraudulent deeds and dispositions of
property. Section 421 WC covers benami transactions in fraud of creditors.

10.7 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1) Discuss in detail essential elements of theft with and also refer to proper
illustrations and case laws.

2) Distinguish between theft and extortion. "A threatens to publish a defamatory

libel concerning B unless B gives him money. He thus induces B to give him
money." What offence is committed by A.

3) What is 'cheating' and 'cheating by personation' and also discuss penalty

provisions for the both.

10.8 ANSWERS AND HINTS

Self Assessment Questions

1) Its theft as accused has moved the property out of possession with dishonest
intention.
2) A has committed theft because he has dishonestly extracted tickets worth
money value from a machine which was in the possession of railway.
3) Here A will be guilty of theft because he takes his own suit without paying
the stiching charges.
4) In this case A, Band C will be guilty under Section 382 as they have
committed restraint in order to committing of theft.
5) Constable is liable for committing extortion. See the essential elements of
extortion.
6) See Section 385 of IPC, A will be charged for attempt.
7) Refer to the heading of aggravated form of extortion under Section 386
IPC.

8) See the heading Cheating and its essential elements under Section 315 Il'C.
9) In this case A has committed cheating under Section 416 and B is liable for
attempting to cheat as he. applied for entering his name in the list of
candidates.
10) Refer to Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC along with matter given in reading
material.
11) See provisions under Sections 421 to 424 Wc.

43
Offences Against Person Terminal Questions
and Property
1) Refer to Section 10.3 of the reading material.

2) See Section 383, illustration (a) ofIPC along with Section 10.4 ofthe reading
material)

3) Refer to Sections 415,416,417 and419 ofIPC along with along with Section
10.5 of the reading material

10.9 REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

1) Ratan Lal & Dhiraj Lal's Law of Crimes (Commentry), Bharat Law House,
New Delhi, 26th Ed 2007

2) Basu's Indian Penal Code, Ashoka Law House, Delhi, IO" ed 2008.

3) Nigam, R.C., Law oj Crime, Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan. Ministry of Law &
Justice, Govt. of India, 1986.

4) Bare Act of Indian Penal Code, Latest Edition

5) Misra, S.N., Indian Penal Code,12th ed., Central Law Publications,

Allahabad, 2004.

6) Gaur, K.D., Criminal Law, Cases and Materials, Lexis Nexis, Butterworths
india, Delhi, 4thEd., 2005.

44