GENERAL

EXPLANATIONS
SECTIONS 22-33 IN
IPC

NOTE: ‘WRONGFUL GAIN AND WRONGFUL LOSS’

(S. 23) & ‘DISHONESTLY’ (S.24) IS IMPORTANT FOR
SHORT NOTES
SECTION 22 IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

22. “Movable property”.—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.
‘CORPORAL PROPERTY’

• The definition is restricted to corporal property.

• Corporal property OR Corporeal property is a property which is
having material or physical form or substance, which is visible
and tangible.
• It is a property which may be perceived by the senses, in
contradiction to incorporal rights (like Intellectual property
rights), which are not so perceivable, as obligations of all kinds.
‘LAND AND THINGS ATTACHED TO THE
EARTH’
• This section does not exempt “earth and things attached to the earth”, but “land and things attached to the earth”; "land" and “earth" are
not synonymous terms; and there is a great distinction betweem "the earth" and "earth’’. By severance, things that are immovable become
movable; and it is perfectly correct to call, those things attached, which can be severed; and undoubtedly it is possible to sever earth from
the earth and attach it again thereto: Earth, that is soil, and all the component parts of the soil, inclusive of stones and minerals, when
severed from the earth or land to which it was attached, are movable property capable of being the subject of theft.
• Any part of “the earth”, whether it be stones or sand or clay or any other component, when severed from “the earth”, is movable property.
• Standing crop, so long as it is attached to the earth is not movable property as defined in the Code, but the moment it is, severed from the
earth its character is changed and it can become the subject of theft.
• Fish in any water are corporeal property and they become subject of theft as soon as they are separated from the waters, dead or alive, and
are moved. Thus fish is a movable property (Chandi Kumar v. Abanidhar, SC 1965)
• An Idol is a movable property (Ahmed v. State 1967 Raj.)
• Human body whether living or dead, is not a movable property but a mummy is. (Emp. Ramadhin, 1902 All.)
• Electricity is not a movable property (Avtar Singh v. State 1965 SC). However its unauthorised use is punishable under Electricity Act
2003.
• The expression ‘movable property’ has been defined in some other Acts also. The definitions are different and are limited to the respective
statutes wherein defined.
SECTION 23 IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

23. “Wrongful gain”.—“Wrongful gain” is gain by unlawful means of property

to which the person gaining is not legally entitled.
“Wrongful loss”.—“Wrongful loss” is the loss by unlawful means of property
to which the person losing it is legally entitled.
Gaining wrongfully/Losing wrongfully.—A person is said to gain wrongfully
when such person retains wrongfully, as well as when such person acquires
wrongfully. A person is said to lose wrongfully when such person is wrongfully
kept out of any property, as well as when such person is wrongfully deprived of
property.
 “WRONGFUL GAIN” & “WRONGFUL LOSS”
• 'Wrongful' means prejudicially affecting a party in some legal right. In other words it means violating the legal
right of another without just cause.The gain or loss in order to be wrongful within the meaning of this section
must be caused by unlawful means. The means are said to be unlawful when they render liable to an action or
prosecution. In other words they are means which legally not permissible.

“Wrongful Gain" implies :

• (i) gain of some property;

• (ii) the property to which a person was not legally entitled; and
• (iii) gain must be by unlawful means.
Wrongful gain means acquiring wrongfully as well as retaining wrongfully. It means not only taking another's
property wrongfully but includes retaining of the property wrongfully where the taking of it was not wrongful.

Similarly "Wrongful Loss" means :

(i) loss of some property;

(ii) the property to which the person losing was legally entitled; and

(iii) loss must have been caused by unlawful means.

Wrongful loss means illegally depriving a person of his property and includes illegally keeping a person out of his
property. For either wrongful gain or loss the owner must lose his property or must be wrongfully kept out of it.
WRONGFUL GAIN - CASES

In Mahalingayya pujari case (1959 Cri. L.J.881), a postman signed the postal
receipts of a V.P. Parcel himself with a view to make it appear that they were
received by the addressee and retained the parcel himself, it was held that
retention of the parcel was wrongful gain because postman was bound to return
the undelivered parcels to the postmaster.
WRONGFUL LOSS - CASES

• In K.N. Mehra v. State, AIR 1957 SC 369, the appellant, a cadet on training in the Indian Air Force Academy, Jodhpur, took off an aircraft without
authorisation (and without observing any of the formalities prerequisite to an aircraft flight) and landed in Pakistan. The appellant was arrested and brought
to India and prosecuted for theft of aircraft under section 379. Held, that taking out the aircraft by the appellant for an unauthorised flight and in fact given
the appellant temporary use of the aircraft for his own purpose, and had temporarily deprived the owner of the aircraft, viz., the Government, of its
legitimate use of the particular aircraft for the Indian Air Force on that day. Such an act was clearly a gain or loss by an unlawful means within section 23.

• Narashimhuluv. Nagur Sahib [(1933) 57 Mad. 351] the accused demolished a private structure because it was an encroachment on a public street. It was
held that, as the accused had no justification in law to demolish the structure, their acts amounted to causing wrongful loss and they were guilty of
mischief.

• In Preonath Banerjee v. State, 1869, the accused had forcibly and illegally seized bullocks of a widow in satisfaction of a debt due to the accused by her
deceased husband. Seizure of bullocks was held to be a “wrongful loss".

• In Paltu Goswami v. Ram Kumar 1961, the accused removed jute kept in pond of the complainant for wetting and requested the complainant to take it
away as the accused bona fide claimed the ownership of the pond, it was held that no wrongful loss was caused to the complainant.
SECTION 24 IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

24. “Dishonestly”.—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”.
INGREDIENTS OF S. 24

• In order that an act may be said to have been done dishonestly under the Code; 'wrongful gain' to one
or wrongful loss to another is necessary.
• ‘wrongful gain' and 'wrongful loss’ are defined in section 23 of the Code. Therefore this section has to
be understood in conjunction with section 23.
• It is not necessary for a thing to be done dishonestly that there should be an intention to cause both
‘wrongful gain’ and ‘wrongful loss’, intention to cause wrongful gair or loss would be sufficient.
• It is also not necessary that actual wrongful gain or wrongful loss must result. For instance, if a
domestic servant while doing cleaning in the house of his master finds the master’s watch lying on the
table and puts it under the carpet with the intention of taking away the same after sometime, his
intention being to cause wrongful loss to the master, his act has been done dishonestly.
SECTION 25 IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

25. “Fraudulently”.—A person is said to do a thing

fraudulently if he does that thing with intent to defraud but
not otherwise.
INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 25

• The word ‘defraud’ contains two elements, namely, deceit and injury to the person deceived. ‘Deceit’
means an intentional misrepresentation or concealment of the fact and as per IPC, the injury should be
illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property.
• In Section 25 of the Code the word ‘defraud’ has been applied to deprive someone with the intention
either by obtaining something by deception, or by taking something wrongly without the knowledge
or consent of the owner. Intention to defraud must mean intention to deceive and thereby obtain an
advantage. It is not necessary that this advantage should always be economical.
• In Lilly v. Scrutiny Committee 2005, A person who is not a member of SC or ST, obtains a false
certificate with a view to gain undue advantage to which he was not otherwise entitled to would
amount to commission of fraud.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISHONESTLY
AND FRAUDULENTLY
1. Although the word dishonesty means to deceit, but in IPC, dishonestly includes an
intentional act, to cause wrongful gain or wrongful loss in another. However, in fraudulent
deceit and injury is an essential element.
2. In dishonesty, deceit is not an essential element, whereas in fraudulently deceit or dishonesty
are the vital elements.
3. In dishonesty, there must be monetary gain or loss, whereas in fraudulently, monetary or
economic gain or loss is not always so.
4. Dishonesty may be by innocence. Dishonesty and innocence may overlap. Whereas, fraud
and innocence can never overlap. Fraud itself is deception.
SECTION 26 IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

26. “Reason to believe”.—A person is said to have “reason

to believe” a thing, if he has sufficient cause to believe that thing
but not otherwise.
INGREDIENTS OF S. 26

• Reason to believe is another facet of the state of mind. It is not the same thing as “suspicion” or
“doubt” and mere seeing also cannot be equated to believing.it is higher level of state of mind.
• This section simply means if a person has enough reasons to believe certain thing and not otherwise
it'll come under reason to believe; For example, Police have reason to believe upon finding
fingerprint match on murder weapon that Mrs A has murdered her husband Mr B. this is reason to
believe.
• Suppose ‘B’ a poor man brings to you for sale a valuable gold ornament. B comes at late hours in the
night in suspicious circumstances and offers the ornament for much less of the real price. Here gou
may not know that the ornaments are stolen but you have sufficient cause to believe that they might
be stolen because B offers them at a much low price and at odd hours in the night.~
SECTIONS 27-33 IN THE INDIAN PENAL
CODE

• Refer Bare Act

 THANK YOU
• Note: ‘Wrongful gain and wrongful loss’ (s. 23) &
‘dishonestly’ (s.24) is important for short notes