Offences against Property | Law Optional Notes for UPSC PDF Download

Introduction

It is important to recognize that property can be categorized into two distinct types: movable property and immovable property. Offenses connected to property, whether it is movable or immovable, are subject to punishment under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code of 1860. The legal framework for offenses related to property is outlined in Section 378 to Section 460 of this code.

Theft

The act of theft is defined in Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code. It stipulates that when a person, with a dishonest intention, takes movable property out of the possession of another person without their consent, they are said to commit theft.

There are five primary elements of theft:

• The presence of a dishonest intention to take property.
• The property in question must be movable.
• The property must be taken out of the possession of another person.
• The property must be taken without the person's consent.
• The property must be moved in the course of this taking.

Dishonest intention to take property

The key element in a theft is the presence of a dishonest intention. Taking property alone does not constitute theft; it only becomes theft when the intention behind the act is dishonest. This intention involves causing wrongful gain to one person and wrongful loss to another.

Illustration: If A owns a necklace, and B discovers it in A's house, the necklace is in A's possession. If B dishonestly takes it, B commits theft.

Property should be movable

For an act to be classified as theft, the property in question must be movable. Movable property is defined as property that can be transported or carried. In contrast, property permanently attached to the earth is considered immovable and cannot be the subject of theft, unless it is severed from the earth and made movable without the consent of the person in possession of it.

Illustration: A standing tree attached to the earth is considered immovable property, but it becomes movable when it is cut down.

Case Law: In the case of Pyarelal Bhargava v. the State of Rajasthan, the court ruled that temporary removal of an office file from the chief engineer's office, even if intended to be restored, amounts to theft. The court emphasized that theft requires a permanent loss, and even temporary dispossession constitutes theft.

The property must be taken out of possession of another person

For theft to occur, the property in question must be in the possession of someone other than the offender. Until the property is removed from that possession, no offense has been committed.

Illustration: If Y finds a mobile phone belonging to X on a sofa in X's house, and Y dishonestly removes it, Y commits theft because the mobile phone was in X's possession.

Case Law: In the case of Rakesh v. State of NCT of Delhi, the court held that the mere intention of an offender to take property dishonestly out of another person's possession without their consent is not an offense. The actual removal of the property from another person's possession is a necessary element, as stated in Section 378 of the IPC.

Property should be taken without the person's consent

Taking a person's property without their prior consent, whether express or implied, constitutes theft. The offense occurs when the offender dishonestly takes the property without that person's consent.

Illustration: If S, who is a friend of R, enters R's house and takes a ring from R's table without R's consent, S has committed theft because R's consent was absent.

Case Law: In the case of K.N. Mehra v. the State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not necessary to prove an intention to permanently deprive the owner of property or to obtain wrongful gain to establish a dishonest intention. The absence of the owner's consent at the time of taking the property, combined with a dishonest intention, are the essential elements of theft.

Property should be moved in the course of the theft

Moving the property with a dishonest intention is the initial stage of committing theft. Therefore, the property must be physically moved to constitute an offense.

Illustration: If A goes to B's house and notices a diamond necklace on the table, but A hides the necklace at B's place with the intention to take it on a future visit, A has not committed theft because the property has not been physically moved.

The punishment for theft is outlined in Section 380 of the IPC:

Whoever commits theft shall be liable to a sentence of up to 3 years of imprisonment or a fine, or both.

Extortion

Extortion is legally defined under Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code. This section stipulates that anyone who deliberately instills fear of injury in another person, or in any other individual, and dishonestly compels them, using this fear, to surrender any property, valuable item, or any sealed and signed document, is considered to have committed extortion.

The essential elements of extortion include:

• Deliberately inducing fear of injury in a person.
• Dishonestly compelling the person, who has been made fearful, to deliver their property or valuable security to another person.

Case Law: Dhananjay v. State of Bihar
In this case, the court established that to constitute extortion, these ingredients must be satisfied:

• The accused must induce fear in a person or another individual.
• The accused must intentionally cause fear in the person.
• The inducement must be made by the accused to deliver the property.
• The inducement should be dishonest in nature.

Deliberately putting a person in fear of injury

It is crucial that the fear induced in a person is real and causes wrongful gain to one party and wrongful loss to another. Any act performed under duress is considered voluntary.

Illustration: If Y threatens Z with the publication of a defamatory article in the newspaper about Z and induces Z to give money, this would be considered extortion.

Dishonestly inducing a person to deliver their property or valuables

For extortion to occur, it is necessary for the offender to dishonestly induce a person, who is in fear, to deliver their property or valuable security. The delivery of property under such fearful circumstances is an integral part of extortion, and this can involve both movable and immovable property.

Illustration: If Y induces Z and threatens him to sign a promissory note and deliver it to Y, stating that failure to do so will result in harm to Z's son, this would constitute extortion.

Case Law: Gursharan Singh v. the State of Punjab

In this case, the court emphasized that the most critical element in an extortion case is that the offender must induce fear and compel the person to deliver property or valuable security. Even if the demanded amount is paid after some time, it would still be considered extortion.

The punishment for extortion is specified in Section 384 of the IPC:

Anyone found guilty of extortion can be sentenced to imprisonment, which may extend up to three years, or they may be fined, or both.

More Aggravated Forms of Extortion

Sections 386 to 389 of the IPC address more severe and aggravated forms of extortion.

• Section 386 deals with extortion involving the threat of death or grievous harm to the victim or another person. The punishment can be imprisonment for up to ten years, along with a fine.
• Section 387 addresses attempted extortion, where an individual tries to extort property by instilling fear of death or grievous harm, without the actual commission of extortion. The penalty for this can be imprisonment for up to seven years, along with a fine.
• Section 388 pertains to extortion through threats of accusation against a person. The penalty can be death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of up to ten years. It also covers attempts to induce others to commit extortion and carries the same penalties.
• Section 389 involves attempted extortion by instilling fear of an accusation of an offense, even if the actual act of extortion does not occur. The punishment can be death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for up to ten years, along with a fine.

Robbery

Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that all cases of robbery involve either theft or extortion. Robbery is defined as the felonious act of taking the personal property of another person from their person or immediate presence against their will, using force and fear, with the intention of permanently depriving the owner of their property.
Robbery needs to be understood in the context of both theft and extortion.

When Theft Becomes Robbery:

Robbery occurs when, while committing theft or moving property, the offender does any of the following acts:

• Voluntarily causes or attempts to cause death, hurt, or wrongful restraint to any person.
• Voluntarily causes or attempts to cause fear of immediate death, hurt, or wrongful restraint to any person.

These actions should be done with the intent to commit theft, while in the process of committing theft, or when carrying away property that has been obtained through theft.

Illustration: A discovers jewels in B's house, takes them without B's consent, and in doing so, wrongfully restrains B. In this case, A commits theft, and to classify it as robbery, A wrongfully restrains B.

When Extortion Becomes Robbery:

Extortion becomes robbery when the offender performs any of the following acts:

• Commits extortion and puts a person in fear of immediate death, hurt, or wrongful restraint.
• Induces a person and puts them in fear to deliver property.
• Puts a person in fear at the time of extortion.

Illustration: B encounters C on the highway, where C points a pistol at B, demands B's purse, and B surrenders it. In this scenario, C has committed extortion, and by inducing fear of immediate death, C has also committed robbery.

The punishment for robbery is outlined in Section 392 of the IPC:

Anyone who commits robbery may be sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term that can extend up to ten years, along with a fine.

The punishment can be extended up to fourteen years if the offender commits robbery on highways between sunset and sunrise.

For attempting to commit robbery, the punishment is rigorous imprisonment for seven years, along with a fine.

Dacoity

Section 391 of the IPC states that when five or more persons act together to commit or attempt to commit robbery, it is referred to as dacoity. Essentially, the difference between robbery and dacoity is the number of offenders involved. If a group of five or more individuals jointly commits or attempts to commit robbery or assists in doing so, it is classified as dacoity.

Case Law: Amrish Devnarayan v. the State of Gujarat

In this case, the court held that to prove dacoity, certain facts must be established:

• In the commission of an offense, there should be five or more accused persons involved.
• The attempt to commit the offense or the actual commission of the offense should be a joint effort.

The punishment for dacoity is specified in Section 395 of the IPC:

Anyone who commits dacoity can be punished with life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment that may extend up to ten years, along with a fine.

Criminal Misappropriation of Property

Meaning of Misappropriation

Misappropriation, in the context of criminal law, refers to the dishonest appropriation and use of another person's property for one's own benefit.

Dishonest Misappropriation of Property under Section 403 of IPC:

Section 403 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offense of dishonest misappropriation of property. According to this section, any person who dishonestly misappropriates movable property or converts movable property for their own use may be punished with imprisonment for a term that can extend to two years, a fine, or both.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• Dishonest misappropriation of property.
• The property in question must be movable.
• The property should belong to the complainant.

Illustration: If Y takes property that belongs to X out of X's possession in good faith, believing it to be his own, Y is not guilty of theft. However, if Y later discovers that the property doesn't belong to him and dishonestly appropriates it for his own use, Y is guilty of dishonest misappropriation of property.

Case Law: Ramaswami Nadar v. the State of Maharashtra

In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that the words "converts to his own use" in Section 403 necessarily imply that the accused has used the property in a manner that violates the rights of the owner of that property.

Finder of Goods:

A person who finds lost goods and, at the time of finding, has no dishonest intention is not committing an offense. A mere change in intention afterward does not make the possession illegal. The finder of goods can take possession of those goods if they have taken all necessary steps to find the real owner of the goods. They can use the goods for themselves if the true owner is not found.

Dishonest Misappropriation of Property Possessed by a Deceased Person at the Time of Death under Section 404 of IPC:

Section 404 of the IPC deals with the dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by a deceased person at the time of their death. According to this section, any person who dishonestly misappropriates or converts to their own use any property of a deceased person, knowing that it was in the possession of the deceased at the time of their death and was not in the possession of any legal heir entitled to it, may be punished with imprisonment of up to three years and may also be fined. If the offender was a servant or a clerk at the time of the deceased person's death, they can be liable for up to seven years of imprisonment.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• The property must be movable.
• The property should have been in the possession of the deceased at the time of their death.
• The misappropriation of the property must be done by the accused.
• The act must be done dishonestly by the accused.

Case Law: State of Orissa v. Bishnu Charan Muduli

In this case, the Supreme Court held a Head constable liable for forcibly taking articles from a boatsman, who had previously recovered them from the body of a drowned person. The Head constable was held liable under Section 404 for dishonestly keeping the articles that belonged to the deceased person.

Criminal Breach of Trust

Criminal breach of trust is under Section 405 of IPC

Criminal breach of trust is covered under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This offense occurs when a person, to whom property or dominion over property belongs, dishonestly misappropriates or converts it for their own use, fraudulently uses or disposes of the property in violation of any law that prescribes the manner in which trust should be discharged, or in violation of any legal contract (whether express or implied) made for the discharge of the trust.

Illustration: If Y is the executor of the will of a deceased person and, while executing the will, Y dishonestly disobeys the law that directs him to divide the property equally. Instead, Y fraudulently takes some part of the property for himself. In this case, Y commits a criminal breach of trust.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• Entrustment of property by one person to another.
• The offender misappropriates or converts the property for their own use.
• Violation of directions or laws prescribed for discharging the trust.
• The property must be dishonestly converted or misappropriated.

Case Law: Shiva Sagar Tiwari v. Union of India

In this case, the Supreme Court held that a minister holds a position of a trustee in respect of public property. It is the minister's duty to deal justly and fairly with public property. If the minister fails to do so, they will be liable for criminal breach of trust.

The punishment for criminal breach of trust is defined in Section 406 of the IPC:

Any person who commits criminal breach of trust may be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend up to three years, a fine, or both.

Receiving Stolen Property

Section 410 of IPC defines Receiving stolen property

This section states that if a person possesses property that has been transferred through theft, extortion, or robbery, and that property has been criminally misappropriated or is subject to criminal breach of trust, it is considered stolen property. This transfer or misappropriation can take place either within or outside India. However, if a person has lawful possession of such property, it ceases to be stolen property.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• The property must be stolen property.
• It is not necessary that misappropriation or breach of trust occurred within or outside India.
• The property comes into the possession of a person legally entitled to it, which then ceases to be stolen property.

Section 411 of the IPC defines dishonestly receiving stolen property 

This offense occurs when a person dishonestly receives or retains stolen property, knowing that it is stolen or having reason to believe it is stolen property. The punishment for this offense is:
Imprisonment for a term that may extend to three years, a fine, or both.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• The accused has possession of stolen property.
• The property was in the possession of another person before the accused obtained it.
• The property is stolen, and the accused has knowledge of this fact.

Case Law: Nagappa Dhondiba v. State

In this case, stolen ornaments of a deceased woman were recovered by the information given by the accused within thirty days of the woman's murder. The court held that the accused would be liable under Section 411, not under Section 302 (murder) or Section 394 (voluntarily causing hurt while committing robbery) due to lack of evidence to support the more severe charges.

Cheating

Meaning

Cheating is a deceptive practice aimed at defrauding or attempting to defraud another person of their rightful claims through cunning means, contrary to the principles of common honesty.

Section 415 of IPC defines Cheating

Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines cheating as the act of deceiving any person to fraudulently or dishonestly induce that person to deliver property to another person, to consent to another person retaining property, or to intentionally induce that person to do something they would not do if not deceived. This act or omission should cause or is likely to cause damage or harm to the deceived person in body, mind, reputation, or property.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• Deception: Deceiving a person by making them believe something untrue or misleading them through words or actions.
• Dishonest intention: Having fraudulent or dishonest intentions at the time of making a promise with the aim of retaining property.
• Causes Damage: The harm or damage must be to the mind, body, property, or reputation of the deceived person and not to any other person.

Illustration: Z, knowing that certain gemstones are not real diamonds, intentionally deceives Y by misrepresenting them as genuine diamonds and dishonestly induces Y to take an action. In this case, Z commits cheating.

Cheating by Personation:

Section 416 of the IPC defines cheating by personation, which occurs when a person cheats by pretending to be someone else, knowingly substituting another person, or representing that they are another person.

Punishment for Cheating:

Section 417 of the IPC deals with the punishment for cheating. Any person found guilty of cheating may be punished with imprisonment of either description, which may extend to one year, a fine, or both.

Punishment for Cheating by Personation:

Section 419 of the IPC specifies the punishment for cheating by personation. Those found guilty of cheating by personation may be punished with imprisonment of either description, which may extend to three years, a fine, or both.

Cheating and Dishonestly Inducing Delivery of Property:

Section 420 of the IPC addresses cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property. This offense is committed when a person cheats another person and induces them to deliver their property to the offender, or to make an alteration, or to destroy a valuable security. Offenders may be punished with imprisonment of either description, which may extend to seven years, and may also be liable for a fine.

Mischief

Section 425 of IPC defines Mischief

Section 425 of the IPC defines mischief as the act of causing the destruction of property, knowing that it is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage to the public or any person, even if there was no intention to cause such damage.

Essential ingredients to commit this offense include:

• Intention or Knowledge: The intention or knowledge that the act will cause wrongful loss to the public or any person.
• Destruction of Property: The act of destroying property.
• Diminished Value: The destruction should result in a diminished value of the property, leading to wrongful loss.

Illustration: C intentionally throws D's necklace into the sea with the intent to cause wrongful loss to D. Here, C commits mischief.

Punishment for Mischief

Punishment for mischief is specified in Section 426 of the IPC. Any person who commits mischief may be punished with imprisonment of either description, which may extend to three months, a fine, or both.

Aggravated forms of Mischief

Section 427 to Section 440 of IPC deals with the more aggravated offences, they are classified into 7 types:

• Section 427 deals with damage of property valued at Rs. 50 and upwards;
• Section 428 to 429 deals with Mischief done by any person in regard to animals;
• Section 430 to Section 434 deals with mischief done by any person in regard to supply and public works;
• Section 435 to Section 436 deals with Mischief by fire;
• Section 437 to Section 438 deals with mischief in regard to docked vessels;
• Section 439 deals with mischief in regard to any vessel to steal;
• Section 440 deals with mischief with preparation of causing death, hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of such death, hurt or wrongful restraint.

Criminal trespass

Meaning

Any person unlawfully entering the private property of another person, or without his prior permission either implied or express, is said to commit criminal trespass. 

In India, it is a civil wrong and for causing damages compensation is given. But in IPC criminal trespass is considered as a criminal offence and punishable under Section 441.

Section 441 of IPC deals with Criminal Trespass

It refers to an unlawful entry made by a person into a private property of another person, with an intention to commit an offence or to intimidate that person or to annoy or insult the person in whose possession the property is. An entry taken by the person was legal but he unlawfully remains there with an intention to insult or annoy or intimidate that person and is said to commit criminal trespass.

Essential ingredients to commit a Criminal Trespass

• There should be an unauthorised entry on the property of another person;
• An entry which was made should be authorised but unlawfully remaining in the premises;
• Unlawful stay must be with an intention

Case Law: Punjab National Bank Ltd. v. All India Punjab National Bank Employees

In this case, the Supreme Court observed that there is a difference between knowledge and intention. In this case employees of this bank went on a pen-down strike. Here management contention was if employees want to do their job, they are allowed to enter into the premises. Otherwise, they would be considered trespassers. The court observed that the sole intention of the workers was to fulfil their demands. Although the strikers had the knowledge that such actions could annoy the officials, there was no intention to annoy the bank senior authorities. The court held that the strikers did not commit the criminal trespass.

Section 442 of IPC deals with House trespass

Any person who commits criminal trespass while entering or remaining into a building or a vessel or a tent, and that place used as a human dwelling or a building as a place of worship or any place used as custody of a property, is said to commit house-trespass. 

Essential ingredients to commit a House Trespass

It has all three ingredients of criminal trespass:

• There should be an unauthorised entry on the property of another person;
• An entry which was made should be authorised but unlawfully remaining in the premises;
• Unlawful stay must be with an intention;
• The property on which persons enter should be used as a human dwelling or a place of worship or place of custody of property.

Case Law: Makkhan v. Emperor

In this case, the court held that the to commit a house-trespass is an aggravated form of criminal trespass. In committing criminal trespass there is an intention to annoy or insult the holder of the property. Whereas to commit house-trespass the main ingredient is the property is a building with proper walls and roof on it, a mere compound wall cannot be said to be a dwelling house.   

Section 447 of IPC deals with punishment for Criminal Trespass

Any person who commits criminal trespass will be punished with the imprisonment of either description which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.

Section 448 of IPC deals with punishment for House Trespass

Any person who commits house-trespass will be punished with the imprisonment of either description which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

Aggravated forms of Criminal Trespass and House Trespass

• Section 443, Section 455 to Section 460 deals with Lurking House Trespass;
• Section 445, Section 453 to Section 455 deals with Housebreaking;
• Section 446, Section 456 to Section 460 deals with Housebreaking by night;
• Section 449 deals with House trespass with intent to commit an offence punishable with death;
• Section 450 deals with House trespass with intent to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment for life;
• Section 451 deals with House trespass with intent to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment.

Conclusion 

Theoretically, it is stated the property is an extension of the personality of an individual. It serves the purpose of satisfying the self of the individual in society.
The recognition of Right to property as a legal right by the Constitution of India itself speaks of the vitality of property in one’s sustenance in society.
The Indian Penal Code further protects the property holder and creates a deterrence on evils that plan on to infringe the rights of the other, by laying down punishments and fines for various property-related offences.
It is quite interesting and fruitful in this context to inquire into the jurisprudential basis of the concept of property. On an examination of the origin of the institution of property, it is found that the concept of property has been identified as the satisfaction of the self of an individual in society.
A thing having any value to the individual has been recognized as property for affording protection. It is also clear that the property sought to be protected must be in the possession or ownership of a person. This further corroborates with the said basic theory of recognition of property as an extension of the personality of an individual.
Hence all endeavours should be made to protect the property and the related rights for its healthy contributions in society.