A.P Bhardwaj Summary : Criminal Law

Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. PROPERTY OFFENCES
3.  OFFENCES RELATING TO MARRIAGE
4.  GENERAL EXCEPTIONS
5. GRAVE & SUDDEN PROVOCATION - DECISION GUIDE
6.  QUICK DISTINCTIONS TABLE
7. MASTER CASE LAW TABLE
View more

INTRODUCTION

Crime is an offence against society. India's criminal law corpus consists of:

• IPC (Indian Penal Code) - defines offences
• CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code) - procedure to bring criminals to book
• Indian Evidence Act - rules of evidence

PROPERTY OFFENCES

A. Theft (Section 378)

Definition: Whoever intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without consent, moves that property in order to such taking, commits theft.

5 Key Ingredients:

1. Dishonest intention to take
2. Movable property
3. Out of possession of another
4. Without consent
5. Moving of the property

Important Rules:

• Theft is complete the moment property is moved - change of mind later does NOT undo it (Illus. h)
• Taking your own property can be theft if done dishonestly (e.g., pawned watch taken without repaying)
• Items attached to earth are NOT movable - become so once severed
• Taking property in good faith believing it to be your own is NOT theft
• A servant entrusted with property who runs away = theft (not breach of trust, as it was in possession)

B. Extortion (Section 383)

Definition: Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of injury and thereby dishonestly induces delivery of property or valuable security, commits extortion.

Key Ingredients:

1. Intentional threat of injury
2. Fear must be grave enough to unsettle the mind and override free will
3. Dishonest inducement
4. Delivery of property/valuable security

Key Distinction: Extortion requires actual delivery of property to the accused. Mere threatening without delivery = Criminal Intimidation (S.503), not extortion.

C. Criminal Misappropriation (Section 403)

Definition: Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property.

Key Points:

• Possession acquired innocently but retention/use becomes dishonest later
• Misappropriation need not be permanent - even temporary misuse is an offence
• Mere retention is NOT enough - actual appropriation/conversion needed
• Finder of lost property: Not guilty initially, but guilty if owner is known and property is kept
• Punishment: Up to 2 years, or fine, or both

D. Criminal Breach of Trust (Section 405)

Definition: Whoever, being entrusted with property, dishonestly misappropriates or uses/disposes of it in violation of law or contract.

Key Distinction from Misappropriation:

• Misappropriation → possession came innocently (finder/joint owner), no prior relationship
• Breach of Trust → property was entrusted - fiduciary/contractual relationship exists

Critical Test: Was the act done dishonestly? Acting in good faith (even wrongly) is NOT criminal breach of trust - it may only be a civil breach of contract.

E. Cheating (Sections 415-420)

Simple Cheating (S.415 / punishment S.417 = 1 year):

• Deceiving a person fraudulently/dishonestly
• Inducing them to deliver property OR do/omit an act
• Which causes or is likely to cause damage in body, mind, reputation, or property

Cheating with Property Delivery (S.420 - up to 7 years):

• Cheating + actual delivery of property or destruction of valuable security
• More severe because property actually changes hands

Cheating by Personation (S.416):

• Pretending to be another person - real or imaginary
• Examples: fake Civil Service officer, impersonating in exam, posing as deceased person

Difference between S.415 and S.420: If no property passes but only inducement is generated in the mind → S.415. If property is actually delivered → S.420.

 OFFENCES RELATING TO MARRIAGE

Note on S.494 (Bigamy) Exception: Not an offence if previous spouse has been continually absent for 7 years and not heard of as being alive, provided the second spouse is informed of the real state of facts.

Note on S.497 (Adultery): The wife is NOT punishable as an abettor.

 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS

A. Mistake of Fact (Sections 76 & 79)

• Mistake of FACT = valid defence (Ignorantia facti excusat)
• Mistake of LAW = NOT a defence (everyone is presumed to know the law)
• The belief must be reasonable and in good faith
• The believed state of facts, if true, must have justified the act done

When mistake of fact is NO defence: If the fact itself is illegal. You cannot shoot X by mistake (intending to shoot Y) and plead mistake - both acts are crimes.

Superior Orders: The maxim respondeat superior has no application in criminal law. Obeying an illegal order from a superior is NOT a valid defence.

B. Unsoundness of Mind (Section 84)

Rule: Nothing is an offence if, at the time of the act, the person was incapable of knowing:

• The nature of the act, OR
• That the act was wrong or contrary to law

Key Principles:

• Unsoundness must exist at the time of the offence - not before or after
• Legal insanity ≠ Medical insanity - courts apply the legal test (impaired cognitive faculties)
• "Moral insanity", eccentricity, or strange behaviour is NOT a defence
• Insane delusion: still guilty if the accused knew the act was wrong
• Includes: idiots (born), lunatics, persons in unconscious state (e.g., sleepwalking), temporarily non compos mentis due to illness

C. Intoxication (Sections 85 & 86)

• S.85: Complete defence ONLY if intoxicant was administered without knowledge or against will of the accused
• S.86: Voluntary intoxication → accused deemed to have the same knowledge as if sober. But no presumption as to intention - intention must be proved from facts

Rule: Voluntary drunkenness is NOT a defence. Test: was the accused incapable of forming the intention to commit the offence?

D. Right of Private Defence (Sections 96-106)

Core Principle (S.96): Nothing is an offence done in the exercise of the right of private defence.

Conditions:

• Threat must be real and immediate (not remote or imaginary)
• Right is protective, not punitive - not meant to punish the aggressor
• Force used must be proportionate to danger
• Right ends when necessity ends - cannot chase a fleeing attacker
• NOT available to aggressors or in a mutual free fight
• NOT available if there is time to seek public authorities

When right extends to causing DEATH (S.100):

1. Assault causing reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt
2. Assault with intent to commit rape / gratify unnatural lust
3. Assault with intent to kidnap/abduct
4. Assault with intent to wrongfully confine

Private Defence of Property (S.103) - Death justified for:

• Robbery or house-breaking by night
• Mischief by fire to dwelling/property
• Theft/trespass under circumstances reasonably causing apprehension of death/grievous hurt

Four Restrictions under S.99:

1. No right against public servant acting in good faith (unless apprehension of death/grievous hurt)
2. No right when act is directed by a public servant
3. No right when time exists to seek public authority
4. Force must not exceed what is necessary

GRAVE & SUDDEN PROVOCATION - DECISION GUIDE

Exception 1 to S.300: Culpable Homicide is NOT murder if the accused, whilst deprived of power of self-control by sudden and grave provocation, causes death.

Provocation is VALID (Culpable Homicide, not Murder) when:

• Killing was truly sudden - no gap for cooling off
• Provocation was grave enough to deprive a reasonable man of self-control
• Mental background from previous acts can be counted (cumulative provocation)
• Example: Catching spouse in act of adultery and immediately reacting

Provocation FAILS (Guilty of Murder) when:

• Accused showed premeditation - e.g., going home to fetch a weapon first
• Significant time gap between provocation and killing (cooling period)
• Accused staged or sought out the confrontation
• Provocation was mere verbal insult without grave cause
• Reaction was to remote or past grievance, not a sudden event

 QUICK DISTINCTIONS TABLE

MASTER CASE LAW TABLE