THEFT AND EXTORTION

This Article is written by  Anchal Sharma & this article discuss the concept of  THEFT AND EXTORTION

Theft is categorized as an offense under the offenses against property in Indian Penal Code. Theft has been covered under sections 378 till 382. Theft is the crime of taking away someone else’s movable property without that person’s permission. The IPC’s Section 378 provides a definition of theft. At the same time, Section 379 of the IPC defines the punishment for committing the offence of theft.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) distinguishes between two different crimes: theft and extortion. Although taking away someone else’s property without that person’s consent is a common element of each of these crimes, there are some significant distinctions between them.

People sometimes thinks that both of these offences are same but it is important to note here that both of these have various differences which we will understand in this blog. Let us understand these concepts one by one.

THEFT

Theft is defined as the act of moving something with the intention of taking it from someone else’s possession without that person’s consent in Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to Section 22 of the IPC, “moveable property” refers to any property that is not immobile or immovable. Movable property includes things like money, jewels, electronics, and cars.

The property must be removed from the owner’s custody and the accused must have intended to take it in order for it to be considered theft. For instance, it is theft if someone takes a cell phone from someone’s pocket without that person’s knowledge.

KEY ELEMENT OF THEFT UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE

The following essentials need to be fulfilled in order to prove a theft of crime under Indian penal code:

1. Movable Property: to make a property come under the subject of theft, it is important that the property should be movable. It is impossible to steal immovable property. Property that is easily moveable and can be taken from one place to another is referred to as movable property. However, immovable property is defined as that type of property that is fixed to the Earth and cannot be moved, making it a property not subject to theft. But when it is removed from the Earth’s surface, it becomes a subject for theft.
2. Taking out of possession: The accused is required to take the property from the owner’s possession. Physical control over the property is referred to as possession. It cannot be deemed theft if the accused takes the item without taking it out of the owner’s possession. For instance, it is theft as the accused has stolen the owner’s mobile phone out of his hands by snatching it.
3. Without the consent of owner: It is necessary to take the property without the owner’s approval. It cannot be deemed theft if the owner has granted permission to take the property. It is not theft, for instance, if the accused borrows a bike from the owner with consent and doesn’t return it.
4. Intention to steal: It is necessary for the accused to intend to take the property without the owner’s permission or consent. It is possible to infer the accused’s intention to steal based on their actions. It cannot be deemed theft if the accused removes the property by error or misinterpretation.

Even the temporary taking away of property with dishonest intention is considered theft, in the case of Pyarelal Bhargava v. state 1963^[1], after removing a file from the government office and giving it to another person, the employee returned the file to the office two days later. In this case, it was decided that stealing does not always need the permanent taking away of someone’s property; theft can occur when property is taken temporarily and with dishonest intention.

1. No lawful authority: The accused should not possess any lawful right to take the property. It cannot be deemed theft if the accused takes the item while acting legally, like when a police officer seizes stolen property.

PUNISHMENT OF THEFT UNDER IPC

Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) describes the punishment for theft. This provision states that theft carries a maximum imprisonment of three years in, a fine, or both.

Theft, however, might carry a harsher penalty under some conditions. The punishment can include up to seven years of imprisonment and a fine if the stolen property is valuable security, like a promissory note or government bond, or a document that represents money, like a check.

In addition, there is a seven-year maximum imprisonment and a fine if the theft is done within a dwelling house, tent, or vessel that is used as a place for human habitation. Any structure, tent, or vessel used as a place for people to live is referred to as a “dwelling house.”

In the event that the defendant has a prior theft conviction, they may face harsher penalties for future theft charges. In certain situations, the penalty consists of a fine and a maximum sentence of seven years in jail.

EXTORTION

The IPC defines extortion under Section 383. This section states that it is extortion to purposefully put someone in fear about harm coming to them, to others, or to their property, and then dishonestly force that person into giving up any property, valuable security, or anything sealed or signed that could be turned into a valuable security.

The key components of extortion include creating fear in the other person and getting them to give up valuables or security. A damage to oneself, another person, or property could be the source of the fear. The accused must have purposefully created the fear in order for it to be dishonestly generated.

For instance, it is considered extortion when someone threatens to harm someone’s family if they do not supply money.

ESSENTIALS OF EXTORTION

The following essentials needs to be fulfilled in order to prove a crime of extortions. These essentials are as follows:

1. Threat of injury: The accused must make a threat to harm the victim’s person, reputation, property, or anyone else in whom the victim has interest. The injury could include property damage, mental distress, or bodily suffering.
2. Compelling the victim to deliver the property or some valuable security: To be considered credible, the threat must be intended to compel the victim into giving up property or valuable security, or to do or not do any action to which he is not legally required to perform, but is legally authorized to perform.

Case law: State of Punjab v. Major Singh (1996)^[2], the accused in this case was a police officer who was suspected of extortion. The accused was found guilty of extortion by the Supreme Court because he had threatened to incriminate a truck driver and demanded money from him.

1. The threat needs to be made dishonestly: It needs to be made with malice intention. A threat cannot be deemed extortion if it is made with good intentions or for a legitimate reason.
2. Threatening to take the property or valued security is necessary: The victim must be threatened with harm if the accused does not give up valued property or security.

A case on this point is that of Subhash Chandra v. State of Delhi 2013^[3], the accused person in this case was a government official who was suspected of extortion. The accused was found guilty of extortion by the Supreme Court because he had threatened to delay license issue and sought bribe money from a firm.

Section 383 of the IPC allows for the accusation of extortion against the accused if all these requirements are satisfied.

PUNISHMENT FOR EXTORTION

The Indian Penal Code’s Section 384 describes the punishment for extortion. This clause states that extortion carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison, a fine, or both.

However, the penalty may be harsher if the accused compels the victim into giving up significant security or property by threatening to kill or seriously harm them. In these situations, a fine and up to ten years in jail are possible penalties.

CONCLUSION

According to the Indian Penal Code, theft and extortion are two separate offenses with some significant distinctions. Extortion is placing the property owner in fear and then taking it, whereas theft is taking something without the owner’s permission. Although imprisonment is a penalty for both of these offenses, the severity of the sentence varies. To make sure that people are held accountable and that justice is done, it is critical to comprehend these difference.

REFERENCES

• “The offence of theft under the IPC.” 10 Sept. 2021, https://indianlegalsolution.com/the-offence-of-theft-under-the-ipc/.
• “Theft and Extortion under Indian Penal Code – India’s Biggest Legal Blog.” 18 Jun. 2019, https://blog.ipleaders.in/theft-extortion-indian-penal-code/.
• “Offence Affecting Property – Theft under IPC: Punishment for Theft.” https://www.toppr.com/guides/legal-aptitude/indian-penal-code/offence-affecting-property-theft-under-ipc/.
• “Extortion in the Indian Penal Code – IPC Law Note – WritingLaw.” 10 Aug. 2020, https://www.writinglaw.com/extortion-ipc/.
• “All about Section 384 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 – iPleaders.” 09 Feb. 2022, https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-about-section-384-of-indian-penal-code-1860/.

1. “Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, https://www.barelaw.in/pyare-lal-bhargava-v-state-of-rajasthan/. 1963 AIR 1094 1963 SCR Supl ↑
2. “Major Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab on 16 August, 1996 – Indian Kanoon.” https://indiankanoon.org/doc/111059/. 1967 AIR 63 1966 SCR (2) ↑

3. “Subhash Chand vs State (Delhi Administration) on 8 January, 2013.” 08 Jan. 2013, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/111520823/. AIR 2013 SUPREME COURT 395

   ↑