Kalinga University

Faculty of Law

Course- BBALLB/BALLB Semester-IV

Subject- Law of Crimes-I

Subject Code: BBALLB403/ BALLB403

UNIT 4

Offences against property

Introduction:
Offences against property are covered under Chapter XVII (Sections-378 to 462) of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860. This is second longest chapter of the IPC. Offences relating to property are
mainly divided into two parts, namely movable and immovable. Any offence which is committed
in regard to any property whether it is movable or immovable is punishable under the provisions
of IPC. The basic element common to all these offences is dishonesty. However, the manner in
which dishonesty is exercised differs in different cases. In this chapter we will discuss some
important offences against property, which are as follows:

1. Theft

2. Extortion

3. Robbery

4. Decoity

5. Criminal Misappropriation of Property

6. Criminal Breach of Trust

7. Cheating

8. Criminal Trespass

II. Offences against Property:

Theft:
The offence of theft is defined under Sec.- 378 of the Code in the following words:

“Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable 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 following essentials of this offence:

i. Dishonest intention to take property.

ii. The property must be movable.

iii. The property should be taken out of the possession of another person.

iv. Without the consent of that person.

v. Moving of the property.

Now we will discuss these elements in brief.

i. Dishonest intention to take property:

Intention is the gist of this offence. The intention must be dishonest and it must exist at the time
of taking or removing the property. The word ‘dishonestly’ is defined under Sec. 24 of the Code,
as-“ Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or
wrongful loss to another person, is said to do that thing "dishonestly".” It is not necessary that
the taking must cause wrongful gain to the taker, it would be sufficient if it causes wrongful loss
to the owner of the property. There can be not theft without the dishonest intention. For ex. “A”
believes in good faith the property of “B” to be his own property and takes that property. “A”
will not be held liable for theft, as at the time of taking of the property, he did not take it
dishonestly.

Taking need not be permanent. Theft may be committed without an intention to deprive the
owner of his property permanently.
Stealing of one’s own property may also amount to theft under this Section, as illustration (j)
provides that 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 theintention of
depriving Z of the property as a security for his debt, he commits theft, in as much as he takes it
dishonestly.

ii. Movable property:

The offence of theft can be committed only against movable property. That means only movable
property is subject of theft. The term ‘movable property’ is defined under Sec. 22 of the Code in
the following word:

“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 earth.”

However, anything which is attached to earth may also be the subject of theft in certain
circumstances as Explanation 1 and 2 of Section 378 suggest. Explanation-1 provides that 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 and
Explanation-2 provides that a moving effected by the same act which affects the severance may
be theft.

Animals may also be the subject of theft, as illustration (b) provides that ‘A’ puts a bait for dogs
in his pocket, and thus induces Z's dog to follow it. Here, if A'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’.

iii. Taking out of the possession of another person:

The property must be in possession of someone, whether he is owner of the property or is in

possession of it in some other manner. If the property is in nobody’s possession then the taking
of it would not amount to theft. As the illustration (g) provides- “’A’ finds a ring lying on the
highroad, not in the possession of any person. ‘A’ by taking it commits no theft, though he may
commit criminal misappropriation of property.”

iv. Taking without the consent:

The taking of the property must be without the consent of the person who is in possession of it.
Explanation-5 to Section-378 suggests that consent may be express or implied.

As the illustration (m) and (n) also provides. Illustration (m) says “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.” And the illustration (n) provides “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.”

v. Moving of the property:

The offence of theft is complete when there is dishonest moving of the property. The least
removal of the thing from the place where it was before, amounts to taking though it may not be
carried away. As the illustration (h) says “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.”

Punishment for the offence of theft:

Sec. 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.

Sec. 380 provides punishment for the offence of theft in dwelling house. It provides that 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.

Extortion:
The offence of ‘Extortion’ is defined under Sec.-383 of the Code, which reads as follows:

“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”.

The following two essentials are required for the completion of this offence:

i. Intentionally putting a person in fear of injury to himself or to any other person.

ii. Dishonestly inducing the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or any
valuable thing.
Now we will discuss these elements in brief.

i. Putting any person in fear of injury: One person is put in fear of injury to that person or to any
other person. Injury may be of any kind, i.e. injury to body, property or reputation. Threatening a
person to make a criminal charge against him, whether true or false, may also be sufficient for
the purpose of offence of extortion.

ii. Dishonestly inducing a person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable
security:

Actual delivery of the property by the person put in fear is essential to constitute the offence of
extortion. Where a person put in fear offers no resistance to the carrying off of his property, but
does not deliver any of the properties, then it will not amount the offence of extortion, however it
may amount to the offence of robbery.

Another point to be mentioned here is that the property may be delivered to any person. It is not
necessary that the threat should be used and the property is delivered to the same person. All the
persons who used the threat and who received the property, will be held liable for extortion.

In the case of Romesh Chandra Arora V. the State (AIR 1960 SC 154) the accused took a
photograph of a naked boy and a girl by compelling them to put off their cloths and extorte
money by threatening them to publish it. He was held guilty of the offence of extortion.

Punishment for the offence of extortion:

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.

Differences between Theft and Extortion:

 The offence of theft is committed without consent, as the property is moved out of the
possession of a person without that person’s consent. While in case of extortion the
consent is wrongfully obtained, or we can say the extortion is committed by
overpowering the will of the owner.
 The theft is committed only against the movable property, while extortion can be
committed in relation to any property, movable or immovable.
 In theft the property is taken, while in extortion the property is delivered.
 In theft no threat is used, while in extortion threat is used.
Robbery:
Sec. 390 defines the offence of ‘Robber’. It provides that in all robbery either there is theft or
extortion. That means the offence of robbery is an aggravated form of 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
carving 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.

The chief distinguishing element in robbery, theft and extortion is the presence of imminent fear
of violence. In the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (AIR 1976 SC 1430) ‘A’ snatched the
watch of ‘C’. ‘B’ stopped the victim in order to enable ‘A’ to carry away the watch. As the hurt
caused by ‘B’ had relation to the theft of the watch, the accused were held liable for the offence
of robbery.

Punishment for the offence of robbery:

Sec. 392 provides that whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment
for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if the robbery be
committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be extended to
fourteen years.

Sec. 393 provides that whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Dacoity:
The offence of ‘Dacoity’ is defined under Sec. 391 in the following word:
“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.”

In order to commit dacoity the minimum number of persons required is five. Another
requirement of this Section is that all those five or more persons must act conjointly, i.e. with
prior planning and with a common intention. There must be a united and concerted action on
their part.

In counting the number of offenders for the purposes of this Section the whole number of
persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery and persons present and aiding
such commission or attempt are taken into consideration.

Here we see that the offence of dacoity is an aggravated and graver form or robbery by reason of
more number of offenders involved in the offence. If robbery is committed by 5 or more persons
then it becomes dacoity. We can also say that ‘in every dacoity there is robbery, but in every
robbery there is no dacoity’.

Can less than five persons be convicted?

In the case of Ram Shanker Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 1956 SC 441) six persons were charged
for committing dacoity. Three were acquitted. The charges framed did not indicate that along
with the six persons, there were other unknown persons, who had committed dacoity. The three
persons were held not liable for the offence of dacoity.

Punishment for the offence of dacoity:

Sec. 395 provides that whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or
with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine.

Sec. 396 provides that if any one of five or more persons, who are conjointly committing
dacoity, commits murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished
with death, or imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to
ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Criminal Misappropriation of Property:

Sec. 403 defines this offence by the name ‘Dishonest Misappropriation of property’ in the
following words:

“Whoever dishonestly misappropriates 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.”

The word ‘misappropriation’ means a dishonest appropriation, and use of another’s property for
sole purpose of capitalizing it for one’s own use.

As for example- ‘A’ takes property belonging to ‘Z’ out of Z’s possession in good faith,
believing , at the 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 the offence under Section 403.

Two essentials are required for the completion of this offence:

i. Dishonest misappropriation or conversion of property for a person’s own use.

ii. Such property must be movable.

This offence differs from theft, as in case of theft the offender dishonestly takes the property
which is in the possession of another person, while in criminal misappropriation the possession
of the property may come innocently in the hand of the accused but where, by a subsequent
change of intention or from the knowledge of some new facts, with which the accused was not
previously acquainted, the retaining becomes wrongful and fraudulent.

Criminal Breach of Trust:

Section 405 defines this offence in the following word:

“Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property,
dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or
disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such
trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made
touching the discharge of such trust, or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits
"criminal breach of trust".

Section 405 covers the relationship of a trustee and beneficiary, master and servant, guardian and
ward, and the principal and agent. It connotes that the accused holds the property for, and on
behalf of another. Hence in all such transactions there is an element of trust between the parties
due to which one of the parties entrusts its property to another. In order to constitute a legal
entrustment, a person who is the owner of the property must actually transfer the possession of
the property, to another person whom he trusts, so as to create a fiduciary relationship between
them. In such cases the party entrusted with the property is required to discharge the trust in
accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed in the contract or in a legally prescribed
manner. Unless there is trust between the parties there cannot be a breach of the trust.

For the completion of the offence under this Section following essentials are required:

i. There is a relationship of trust between two parties.

ii. One party entrusts some property either movable or immovable to the other party.

iii. The party entrusted with the property

 Dishonestly misappropriates; or
 Converts to his own use; or
 Dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in a manner contrary to that prescribed by
the legal contract under which he was entrusted with such property, or otherwise in an
illegal manner.

Punishment for the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust:

Section 406 provides that whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with
both.

Cheating:
Sec. 415 defines the offence of ‘Cheating’. It provides that:

“Whoever, by deceiving any person, 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
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, is said to cheat”.

The essential requirements to constitute the crime of cheating are:

i. Accused must deceive someone;

ii. The accused must have induced a person dishonestly or fraudulently to give his consent to
either deliver some property or agree that some person shall retain any property;
iii. The accused must intentionally induce some person to do or abstain from doing something
which he would not do or abstain from doing had he not been so induced; and

iv. The act or abstinence which this deception leads to, either causes or is likely to cause some
damage to such person in mind, body, reputation or property.

As for example- 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
will be held liable for cheating.

Punishment for Cheating:

Sec. 417 provides 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.

Cheating by personation:

Sec. 416 provides that 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 another, or representing that he
or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is.

As for example- ‘A’ cheats by pretending to be a certain rich banker of the same name. A cheats
by personation.

Sec. 419 makes ‘Cheating by personation’ punishable with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both.

Criminal Trespass:
The offence of Criminal Trespass is defined under Sec. 441 in the following word:

“Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an
offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property, or having
lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to
intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence, is said to
commit criminal trespass".

Sec. 447 makes ‘Criminal Trespass’ punishable with imprisonment of either description which
may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
House Trespass:
Sec. 442 provides that whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any
building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling, or any building used as a place for worship, or
as a place for the custody of property, is said to commit ‘house trespass’.

Sec. 448 make ‘House trespass’ punishable with imprisonment of either description which may
extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Conclusion:
At the last we can say that Indian Penal Code, 1860 is an important legislation. It covers various
kinds of offences such as offences against body, offences against property, offences against
marriage etc. Chapter XVII of it deals with the ‘Offences against Property’. It defines the various
offences against property such as- theft, extortion, robbery, dacoity, misappropriation of
property, and it also deals with the offences against immovable property such as the offence of
criminal trespass and house trespass etc. It talks about the essential elements of all these offences
which are required to be proved by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused and at the
last it also provides the punishment for the commission of these offences.

Q.1 When extortion becomes robbery?

Ans.- 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.

The chief distinguishing element in robbery and extortion is the presence of imminent fear of
violence. In robbery the offender is in presence of the person put in fear and commits extortion
then and there.

Q.2 If the offence of robbery is committed on the high way between sun set and sun rise,
then what shall be the punishment?

Ans.- Sec. 392 provides that whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if
the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be
extended to fourteen years.

Q.3 What is the difference between Robbery and Dacoity?

Ans.- The offence of dacoity is a aggravated and graver form or robbery by reason of more
number of offenders involved in the offence. If robbery is committed by 5 or more persons then
it becomes dacoity. We can also say that ‘in every dacoity there is robbery, but in every robbery
there is no dacoity’.

References
(i) Books:-

1. S.N. Mishra, Indian Penal Code, Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 20th Edition (2016)

2. K.D. Gour, The Indian Penal Code, Universal Law Publishing Co.Pvt. Ltd., 6th Edition (2016)

3. P.S.A. Pillai, Criminal Law, LexisNexis Butterworths, 11th Edition (2012)

4. Bare Act- Indian Penal Code, 1860

(ii) Links:-

1. https://www.examrace.com/Study-Material/Law/Law-Property-Offence.html

2. http://vle.du.ac.in/mod/book/view.php?id=8975&chapterid=12878

Objective:
The objective of this module is to understand the various offences against property given in the
IPC in depth. By reading this module we will understand how the Indian Penal Code makes
provisions for the protection of our property, whether movable or immovable. We will come to
know the various Sections of the IPC which deals with the offences against property such as-
Theft, Extortion, Robbery, Decoity, Criminal Misappropriation of Property, Criminal Breach of
Trust, Cheating, Criminal Trespass, etc. By reading this module we will be able to analyze the
essential elements of these offences which are required to constitute the offence. We will come
to know the punishment provides for the various offences against property.

Summary:
This module deals with Chapter XVII of the IPC, i.e. ‘Offences against Property’. This is the
second longest chapter of the IPC. This Chapter prohibits and makes punishable any unlawful
invasion on one’s property whether movable or immovable. The offences against property can be
broadly classified into the following heads, i.e. Theft, Extortion, Robbery, Decoity, Criminal
Misappropriation of Property, Criminal Breach of Trust, Cheating, Criminal Trespass, etc.
Offence of theft is defined under Sec. 378 and is punishable from Sec. 379-382.

Offence of extortion is defined under Sec. 383 and is punishable from Sec. 384-389. Robbery is
defined under Sec. 390 and various kinds of robbery is punishable from Sec. 392-394. Dacoity is
defined under Sec. 391 and is punishable under Sec. 395 and 396. Criminal Breach of trust is
defined and punishable under Sec. 403. Criminal breach of trust is defined under Sec. 405 and is
punishable under Sec. 406. The various kinds of cheating are defined and punishable from Sec.
415 to 420 and the various forms of criminal trespass and house trespass are defined and
punishable from Sec. 441 to 462.

Glossary:
I.P.C. : Indian Penal Code

SC : Supreme Court

HC : High Court

Sec. : Section

Ex. : Example

Cr.L.J. : Criminal Law Journal

AIR : All India Reporter

SCC : Supreme Court Cases

FAQs:
Q.1 Define theft. What are the essentials of theft?

Ans.- The offence of theft is defined under Sec.- 378 of the Code in the following words:

“Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable 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 following essentials of this offence:

i. Dishonest intention to take property.

ii. The property must be movable.

iii. The property should be taken out of the possession of another person.

iv. Without the consent of that person.

v. Moving of the property.

Q.2 What are the differences between theft and extortion?

Ans.- The differences between theft and extortion can be discussed under the following points:

1. The offence of theft is committed without the consent, as the property is moved out of the
possession of a person without that person’s consent. While in case of extortion the consent is
wrongfully obtained, or we can say the extortion is committed by overpowering the will of the
owner.

2. The theft is committed only against the movable property while extortion can be committed in
relation to any property, movable or immovable.

3. In theft the property is taken, while in extortion the property is delivered.

4. In theft no threat is used, while in extortion threat is used.

Q.3 When extortion becomes robbery?

Ans.- 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.

The chief distinguishing element in robbery and extortion is the presence of imminent fear of
violence. In robbery the offender is in presence of the person put in fear and commits extortion
then and there.

Q.4 If the offence of robbery is committed on the high way between sun set and sun rise,
then what shall be the punishment?

Ans.- Sec. 392 provides that whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if
the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be
extended to fourteen years.

Q.5 What is the difference between Robbery and Dacoity?

Ans.- The offence of dacoity is a aggravated and graver form or robbery by reason of more
number of offenders involved in the offence. If robbery is committed by 5 or more persons then
it becomes dacoity. We can also say that ‘in every dacoity there is robbery, but in every robbery
there is no dacoity’.

Q.6 If the death of any person in caused while committing dacoity, then what shall be the
punishment?

Ans.- Sec. 396 provides that If any one of five or more persons, who are conjointly committing
dacoity, commits murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished
with death, or imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to
ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Q.7 What is cheating by personation?

Ans.- Sec. 416 provides that 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 another, or representing
that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is.

Q.8 What is the offence of ‘House Trespass’? What is the punishment for it?

Ans.- Sec. 442 provides that whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in
any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling. or any building used as a place for
worship, or as a place for the custody of property, is said to commit ‘house trespass’. Sec. 448
make ‘House trespass’ punishable with imprisonment of either description which may extend to
one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.