OFFENCES AGAINST

PROPERTY
Only 1 Month
Remaining!
Law Entrance Exam 2021
 Kriti Bhatnagar

● B.A LLB, NLIU Bhopal (2019)

● LLM, GNLU Gujarat (2020)
● Cleared UGC NET (2020)
● CLAT - All India Rank 339
Vast Syllabus vs Limited Time
5+ Subjects
Board Exams
20+ Books
Limited Time
New Pattern
Exclusive CLAT Batches
The Unacademy Advantage
 Subscribe Now and
Get 10%
Extra Off!
Apply Code:
KRITIB

KRITIB
1. Theft
2. Robbery
3. Extortion
4. Dacoity
5. Criminal misappropriation
6. Criminal breach of trust
7. Mischief
8. Criminal Trespass
Examples
(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.
(n) A asks charity from Z’s wife. She gives A money, food and clothes, which A
knows to belong to Z her husband. Here it is probable that A may conceive that Z’s
wife is authorised to give away alms. If this was A’s impression, A has not
committed theft.
(o) 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 no authority from Z to
give. If A takes the property dishonestly, he commits theft.
Examples

(p) A, in good faith, believing property belonging to Z to be A’s own property, takes
that property out of B’s possession. Here, as A does not take dishonestly, he does
not commit theft. Comments Ingredients The delay in hearing of appeal for long
period is no cause for not interfering with an order of acquittal which was based on
conjectures and surmises, resulting in gross failure of justice; State of Rajasthan v.
Shanker, 2000 Cr LJ 266 (Raj). Taking need not be permanent It is not necessary
that the taking should be of a permanent character, or that the accused should have
derived any profit. A temporary removal of an office file from the office of a Chief
Engineer and making it available to a private person for a day or two amounts to
the offence of theft; Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1963 SC 1094.
Question
A goes into the forest and catches a wild cat that was roaming
around the forest. Is this theft?

A goes to B’s house and take away B’s pet dog. Is this theft?

A takes away B’s property papers, to be duplicated and to return

in two days. Two days later he keeps the papers back in B’s
drawer. B sees this in the CCTV footage. Did A Commit theft?
Extortion
Extortion.—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”.
(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 con­
finement, unless Z will sign and deliver to A a promissory note
binding Z to pay certain monies to A. Z signs and delivers the note.
A has committed extortion.
Examples

(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 signs
and delivers the paper to A. Here, as the paper so signed may be
converted into a valuable security. A has committed extor­tion.
Robbery

390. Robbery.—In all robbery there is either theft or extortion. When theft is
robbery.—Theft is “robbery” if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in
committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property
obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to
cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of
instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint. When extortion is robbery.—Extortion
is “robbery” if the offend­er, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the
presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person
in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that
person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person so put
in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted. Explanation.—The offender
is said to be present if he is suffi­ciently near to put the other person in fear of
instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
Examples

(a) A holds Z down and fraudulently takes Z’s money and jewels
from Z’s clothes without Z’s consent. Here A has committed theft,
and in order to the committing of that theft, has voluntarily caused
wrongful restraint to Z. A has therefore committed rob­bery.
(b) A meets Z on the high roads, shows a pistol, and demands Z’s
purse. Z in consequence, surrenders his purse. Here A has extort­ed
the purse from Z by putting him in fear of instant hurt, and being
at the time of committing the extortion in his presence. A has
therefore committed robbery.
Examples

(c) A meets Z and Z’s child on the high road. A takes the child and
threatens to fling it down a precipice, unless Z delivers his purse. Z, in
consequence delivers his purse. Here A has extorted the purse from Z, by
causing Z to be in fear of instant hurt to the child who is there present. A
has therefore committed robbery on Z.
(d) A obtains property from Z by saying—“Your child is in the hands of
my gang, and will be put to death unless you send us ten thousand
rupees”. This is extortion, and punishable as such; but it is not robbery,
unless Z is put in fear of the instant death of his child. COMMENTS In
order that theft may constitute robbery, prosecution has to establish—
(a) if in order to the committing of theft; or
(b) in committing the theft; or
(c) in carrying away or attempting to carry away property ob­tained by theft;
(d) the offender for that end i.e. any of the ends contemplated by (a) to (c);
(e) voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful
restraint or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or instant wrongful restraint. 
Dacoity

Dacoity.—When five or more persons conjointly commit or

attempt to commit a robbery, or where the whole number of
persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery,
and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt,
amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting
or aiding, is said to commit “dacoity”.
Differences In case of theft, movable property is taken away without owner’s
consent; in case of extortion, consent of the person is obtained wrongfully by coercion;
in case of robbery, the offender takes property without consent, robbery being the
aggravated form of theft or extortion and in the case of dacoity also, there is no consent
or it is obtained wrongfully.

Theft may occur only of movable property whereas, extortion may occur of movable or
immovable property, and in the case of both robbery and dacoity, it may be committed
with respect to immovable property, where it is in the form of extortion and not
otherwise. There is no element of force or compulsion, in case of theft; force or
compulsion exist in extortion, the person being put in fear of injury to himself or to any
other persons.

There is no delivery of property by the victim, in theft; whereas there is delivery in

extortion; in case of robbery and dacoity, there is no delivery if theft occurs during the
course of robbery or dacoity.
Dishonest Misappropriation
Dishonest misappropriation of property.—Whoever dishonestly mis-appropriates or converts to
his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Illustrations(a) A takes property
belonging to Z out of Z’s possession, in good faith, believing, at any time when he takes it, that
the property belongs to himself. A is not guilty of theft; but if A, after discovering his mistake,
dishonestly appropriates the property to his own use, he is guilty of an offence under this section.
(b) A, being on friendly terms with Z, goes into Z’s library in Z’s absence, and takes away a book
without Z’s express consent. Here, if A was under the impression that he had Z’s implied consent
to take the book for the purpose of reading it, A has not committed theft. But, if A afterwards
sells the book for his own benefit, he is guilty of an offence under this section.
(c) A and B, being joint owners of a horse, A takes the horse out of B’s possession, intending to
use it. Here, as A has a right to use the horse, he does not dishonestly misappropriate it. But, if A
sells the horse and appropriates the whole proceeds to his own use, he is guilty of an offence
under this section. 
SAMEERLIVE
KRITIB