“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 166
(..19..)
OFFENCES AGAINST PROPERTY
QUESTION BANK
Q. 1 Explain the ingredient of offence of cheating
Q. 2 In all Robbery, there is either theft or exotic elucidates. Distinguish between
Robbery and Dacoity
Q.3 Define & explain ‘Robbery’ and distinguish it from ‘Dacoity’
Q.4 Define and explain ‘cheating’
Q.5 Define and explain ‘Theft’
Q.6 What is extortion? Distinguish it from robbery.
SHORT NOTES
1. Cheating by personation.
2. Robbery & Dacoity
3. Theft and extortion
4. Criminal misappropriation and criminal branch of trust.
5. Mischief
6. Criminal breach of Trust.
7. Cheating.
INTRODUCTION:-
Chapter XVII is the second-longest chapter in the BNS, 2023. It consists of
sections 303 to 377.
Offences against property can be divided into three groups, viz. -
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 167
A)
B)
C)
Offences dealing with deprivation of property (Ss. 303 to 335)
Offences dealing with damage to property (Ss. 336 to 346)
Offences in relation to violation of rights to property in order
to commit some other offences (Ss. 347 to 377)
A)
Offences Dealing with Deprivation of Property (Ss. 378 to 424):-
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Theft (S. 303-309)
Extortion (S. 310-312)
Robbery and Dacoity (S. 313-320)
Criminal misappropriation of property (S. 321-322)
Criminal breach of trust (S. 323-326)
Receiving stolen property (S. 327-330)
Cheating (S. 331-334)
Dishonest Misappropriation of lost property (S. 335)
B)
C)
Offences Dealing with Damage to Property (Ss. 226 to 246)
1) Mischief (S. 336-345)
2) Criminal Trespass causing damage (S. 346)
Offences in Relation to Violation of Rights to Property in order to Commit
some other Offences (Ss. 347 to 377)
1)
2)
3)
Criminal Trespass. (S. 347-350)
House Trespass (S. 351-359)
Lurking House Trespass/ Housebreaking. (S. 360-363)
4) Dishonest of criminal intention in trespass (S. 364-368)
5) Offences connected with possession, concealment, fraudulent dealing in
property (S. 369 -377).
It shows that the structure of BNS is very similar to that of IPC, so for offences
relating to property are concerned. There are only renumbering of sections.
THEFT (Ss. 303 to 335):-
1)
Synopsis
I.
Definition:-
II.
Explanations:-
Punishment: -
III. Ingredients:-
1) Dishonest Intention:-
2) Movable Property:-
3) Out of the Possession of any Person:-
4) Without the Consent of that Person:-
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 168
5) Moves that Property:-
IV. Aggravated forms of theft (Ss. 380 to 382):-
1. Snatching (S. 304):
2. Theft in a Dwelling (S. 305):
3. Theft by a Clerk or Servant (S. 306):
4. Theft with preparation for harm (S. 307):
I.
Definition:-
Whoever-
i)
Intending to take dishonestly,
Any movable property,
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
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 (S.303)
II.
Explanations:-
Five explanations are provided for the definition of theft.
Explanation 1: - A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being moveable
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.
Explanation 2: A move effected by the same act that affects the severance may be
theft.
Explanation 3: - A person is said to cause a thing to move by removing an obstacle
that prevented it from moving or by separating it from any other thing as well as by actually
moving it.
Explanation 4: - A person who by any means causes an animal to move is said to
move that animal and to move everything which, in consequence of the motion so caused,
is moved by that animal.
Explanation 5: - The consent mentioned in the definition may be expressed or
implied and may be given either by the person in possession or by any person having for
that purpose authority, either express or implied.
Illustrations
a) A cut down a tree on Z’s ground with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out
of Z’s possession without Z’s consent. Here, as soon as A has severed the tree in order
to do such taking, he has committed theft.
b) A puts bait for dogs in his pocket and thus induces Z’s dog to follow it. Here, if A’s
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 169
intention is dishonest 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.
c) A meets a bullock carrying a box of treasure. He drives the bullock in a
certain direction in order that he may dishonestly take the treasure. As soon as the
bullock begins to move, A has committed theft of the treasure.
d)
A, being Z’s servant and entrusted by Z with the care of Z’s plate, dishonestly runs
provided by the section are given in a footnote for reference]
Punishment: - For theft, for the first conviction, the punishment is up to 3 years or a
1
e) Z, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of a warehouse, till Z shall return. A carries the plate to
a goldsmith and sells it. Here the plate was not in Z’s possession. It could not therefore, be taken out of Z’s possession,
and A has not committed theft, though he may have committed criminal breach of trust.
f) A finds a ring belonging to Z on a table in the house which Z occupies, Here the ring is in Z’s possession, and it A
dishonestly removes it, A commits theft.
g) A finds a ring lying on the high road, not in the possession of any person. A, by taking it, commits no theft, though
he may commit criminal misappropriation of property.
h) 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.
i) A delivers his watch to Z, a jeweller, to be regulated. Z carries it to his shop. A, not owing to the jeweller any debt
for which the jeweller might lawfully detain the watch as a security, enters the shop openly, takes his watch by
force out of Z’s hand, and carries it away. Here A, though he may have committed criminal trespass and assault,
has not committed hat, in as much as what he did was not done dishonestly.
j) If A owes money to Z for repairing the watch, and if Z retains the of Z’s possession, with the intention of depriving
Z of the property as a security for his debt, he commits theft, in as much as he takes it dishonestly.
k) Again, if A, having pawned his watch to Z, takes it out Z’s possession, without Z’s consent, not having paid what
he borrowed on the watch, he commits theft, though the watch is his own property, in as much as he takes it
dishonestly.
l) A takes an article belonging to Z out of Z’s possession, without Z’s consent, with the intention of keeping it until
he obtains money from Z as a reward for its restoration. Here A takes dishonestly; A has, therefore committed
theft.
m) 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 has Z’s implied consent to use Z’s book. If this was A’s impression, A has not
committed theft.
n) A asks charity from Z’s wife. She gives 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 authorized to give away alms. If this was A’s impression, A
has not committed theft.
o) A is the paramour of Z’s wife. She gives a valuable property, which A knows to belong to her husband Z and to
be such property as she has no authority from Z to give. If A takes the property dishonestly, he commits theft.
p) A, in good faith, believing property belonging to Z to be A’s own property, takes that property out of Z’s possession.
Here, as A does not take dishonestly, he does not commit theft.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 170
fine or both. However, in case of a second or subsequent conviction of any person,
punishment is rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but
which may extend to five years and a fine. Provided that in case of theft where the value
of the stolen property is less than five thousand rupees, and a person is convicted for the
first time, upon return of the value of the property or restoration of the stolen property, he
shall be punished with community service.
Thus, the community service is a new kind of punishment introduced for theft.
Punishment for being a member of theft or robbery (S. 313)-
Whoever belongs to any gang of persons associated in habitually committing theft
or robbery, and not being a gang of dacoits, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment
up to seven years and a fine.
III. Ingredients: -
1)
Dishonest Intention:-
The intention is the gist of the offence. Merely taking will not amount to the offence
of theft unless the intention with which it is taken is ‘dishonest’. S.24 of the Code defines
‘dishonesty’ as doing anything with the intention of causing Wrongful Gain to one person
or wrongful loss to another person. S. 23 of the Code defines ‘Wrongful Gain’ is the gain
by unlawful means of the property to which the person gaining is not legally entitled.
‘Wrongful Loss’ is the loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing it is
legally entitled. Both ‘Wrongful Gain’ and ‘wrongful loss’ need not be caused at a time;
either of these two is sufficient to constitute an offence of theft. If there is no intention of
taking ‘dishonesty’, there is no theft. A bonafide act does not amount to theft. (See
Illustration P)
Even one can steal his own property if he takes it dishonestly from another (See
Illustration (j). A person will also act dishonestly even though he temporarily dispossesses
another of his property, intending to return it later. (See Illustrations (a) and (l)).
2) Movable Property: -
The subject of the theft is movable property, i.e., corporeal property of every
description except the land and things attached to the earth or permanently fixed to
anything which is attached to the earth or permanently fixed to anything which is attached
to the earth (Explanation I).
Things attached to the earth may become movable property as soon as they are severed
from the earth, and this act of severance itself constitutes theft (Illustration (a))
‘Electricity’ is not ‘movable property’. However, by legal fiction under S.39 of the
Indian Electricity Act, 1910, it is treated as the subject matter of theft.
3)
Out of the Possession of any Person: -
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 171
Theft is an offence against ‘possession’ and not against ‘title’. Therefore, to constitute
an offence of theft, removing the property out of the possession of somebody without his
consent is necessary (Illustration (f))
Thus, there can be no theft of property that belongs to anyone.
Even though the person from whose possession the property is taken may or may not
be its owner, he may be in possession of it, and he may not be its owner; it does not matter
whether his possession is rightful or wrongful [See Illustration (j) and (k)]
4) Without the Consent of that Person: -
The stolen property must be removed without the express or implied consent of the
person in possession. It is not necessary that the person giving consent must be the owner;
he may have physical control over it under an express or implied authority of the owner
[See Illustration (m) and (n)]
5) Moves that Property:-
Dishonestly moving the property out of the person's possession without that person’s
consent constitutes theft. ‘Dishonest Moving’ is sufficient to constitute theft. It is not
necessary that the thing moved should be carried away or carried off [See Explanations 3
and 4 and Illustrations (b) and (c)]
Moreover, taking may not be of a permanent nature; in other words, temporarily
dispossessing another of property constitutes the offence of theft.
IV. Aggravated forms of theft (Ss. 380 to 382):-
The following are the aggravated forms of theft to which severe punishment is
provided.
1. Snatching (S. 304): This new offence involves suddenly and forcibly taking movable
property from a person. The punishment is imprisonment up to three years and a fine.
2. Theft in a Dwelling (S. 305): This covers theft committed within a house or any place
used for human dwelling or property custody. It carries a punishment of up to seven years
in prison and a fine.
3. Theft by a Clerk or Servant (S. 306): This section specifically deals with a clerk or
servant who commits theft of their employer's property. The punishment is imprisonment
up to seven years and a fine.
4. Theft with preparation for harm (S. 307): This is for theft where the offender prepares
to cause death, hurt, or restraint to commit the theft or escape. The punishment is rigorous
imprisonment up to ten years and a fine.
*****
2)
EXTORTION (S. 308):-
SYNOPSIS
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 172
I. Introduction-
II. Definition (S.308):-
III. Ingredients of Extortion:-
1) Intentionally Putting a Person in Fear of Injury: -
2) Dishonest Inducement to Deliver Property etc: -
IV. Aggravated Forms of Extortion (Ss. 308):-
V. Difference between ‘Theft’ and ‘Extortion’:-
1)
2)
3)
4)
As to Property:-
As to Consent:-
As to Inducement / Delivery of Property:-
As to Force:-
VI. Conclusion-
I. Introduction-
The BNS, 2023 has replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. The law on extortion,
previously under IPC Sections 383-389, is now primarily defined in BNS Section 308.
While the fundamental definition of extortion remains the same, the BNS provides a more
organized structure, particularly for aggravated forms, by outlining distinct punishments
within the same section. This change aims for greater clarity and efficiency.
II. Definition (S.308):-
i) Whoever,
ii)
Intentionally,
iii) Puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to
any other, and
iv) Thereby, dishonestly induces the person so put in fear.
v) 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.
ILLUSTRATIONS
(a) A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning Z, unless Z gives him money.
He thus induces Z to give him money. A has committed extortion.
(b) A threatens Z that he will keep Z’s child in wrongful confinement unless Z signs
and delivers to A, a promissory note binding Z to pay certain moneys to A. Z signs
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 173
Punishment: - Imprisonment up to 7 years or fine or both (S. 308 (2)).
III. Ingredients of Extortion: -
1) Intentionally Putting a Person in Fear of Injury: -
Intentionally putting a person in fear of injury to himself or another is the first
requirement of the offence of extortion. S. 2 (14) of BNS defines ‘injury’ as “any harm
whatever illegally caused to any person in body, reputation, or property.”
Thus, the injury that the person may be put in fear of is not necessarily a physical
injury, but injury to the character may also be an injury.
2) Dishonest Inducement to Deliver Property etc: -
The second requirement of the offence of extortion is that the offence should have been
committed with dishonest intention. Thus, the offender must dishonestly induce the person
put in fear to deliver -
i) Any property
ii) Valuable security, or
iii) Anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security
IV. Aggravated Forms of Extortion (Ss. 308):-
1) Extortion by putting a person in fear of injury. Punishment- Imprisonment up to 2
years or with a fine, or with both (S. 308 (3).
2) Putting a person in fear of death or of grievous hurt to him or any other person, in
order to or in attempt to commit extortion, Punishment- Imprisonment up to 7
years and fine (S.308 (4)).
This clause deals with the attempt or the act of merely putting a person in such
fear (death or grievous hurt), whether or not the extortion is actually successful.
3)
Actual committing of extortion by putting any person in fear of death or of
grievous hurt to him or any other person is punishable with imprisonment up to 10
years and fine (S. 308 (5)).
This clause applies when extortion is actually committed (i.e., the victim
delivers property/valuable security because of the fear of death or grievous hurt).
4) In order to commit extortion, putting a person in fear of accusation of having
committed an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or of 10 years,
2
(c) A threatens to send club-men to plough up Z’s field unless Z will sign and deliver to B a bond binding Z under
a penalty to deliver certain produce to B, and thereby induces Z to sign and deliver the bond. A has committed
extortion.
(d) A, by putting Z in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces Z to sign or affix his seal to a blank paper and deliver
it to A. Z signs and delivers the paper to A. Here, as the paper so signed may be converted into a valuable security,
A has committed extortion.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 174
is punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years and fine (S. 308 (6)). [Same
difference as in clause (4) and (5) in Clauses (6) and (7)]
5)
Actual committing extortion by putting any person in fear of accusation of
offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or of 10 years, is punishable
with imprisonment up to 10 years and fine (S. 308 (7)).
V. Difference between ‘Theft’ and ‘Extortion’:-
The offences of ‘theft’ and ‘extortion’ have many common features. Both are
offences against property. Both require ‘dishonest intention’ to constitute an offence.
However, there are the following differences, viz-
1)
2)
3)
4)
As to Property: -
Extortion can be committed with reference to any kind of property, movable or
immovable, whereas theft can be committed in respect of movable property only.
As to Consent: -
In extortion, the victim's consent is obtained wrongfully, whereas in theft, the
property is moved or taken without the owner’s consent.
As to Inducement / Delivery of Property: -
In theft, the property is taken without the owner’s consent, whereas, in extortion,
the person intimidated is induced to deliver the property.
As to Force: -
In theft, there exists no element of force, whereas in extortion, there always exists
an element of force.
VI. Conclusion-
The BNS, 2023, has modernized the law on extortion, providing a more organized and
comprehensive framework than the IPC. By consolidating provisions and clearly defining
aggravated forms, it streamlines the legal process and ensures that the severity of the
punishment aligns with the nature of the crime. The core principles of extortion—the use
of fear to dishonestly induce the delivery of property—remain central to the law.
3) ROBBERY (Ss. 309):-
I. Introduction-
II. Definition: -
1) Theft is Robbery if: -
2)
Extortion is Robbery: -
Explanation: -
3. Robbery is an Aggravated form of Theft or of Extortion: -
4. Punishment (S. 309 (4)). -
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 175
III. Aggravated forms of Robbery: -
I. Introduction-
In the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, Robbery and Dacoity are distinct,
yet related, offenses against property. Robbery is an aggravated form of either theft or
extortion, while dacoity is an aggravated form of robbery itself. The key distinction lies in
the number of offenders.
II. Definition: -
S.309 defines ‘Robbery’ as-
-In all ‘robbery’, there is either theft or extortion.
1) Theft is Robbery if: -
i) In order to the committing of the theft, or
ii) In committing the theft, or
iii) In carrying away, or attempting to carry away,
iv) property obtained by theft,
-the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes (or attempts to cause) to any person
i) Death, or
ii) Hurt, or
iii) Wrongful restraint, or
iv) Fear of instant death, hurt or wrongful restraint
2)
Extortion is Robbery:-
If the offender, at the time of committing extortion-
i) Is in the presence of the person put in fear, and
ii) Commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, instant
hurt, or instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and
iii) By so putting in fear, induces the person to put in fear then and there to deliver
up the thing extorted.
Explanation: -
The offender is said to be present if he is sufficiently near to put the other person in
fear of instant death, of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint.
ILLUSTRATION
a) A holds Z down and fraudulently takes Z’s money and jewels from Z’s clothes without
Z’s consent. Here, A has committed theft and, in order to commit that theft, has
voluntarily caused wrongful restraint to Z. A has therefore committed robbery.
b) A meets Z on the high road, shows a pistol and demands Z’s purse. Z, in consequence,
surrenders his purse. Here, A has extorted the purse from Z by putting him in fear
of instant hurt and being at the time of committing the extortion in his presence. A
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 176
3. Robbery is an Aggravated form of Theft or of Extortion:-
Thus, we may put the definition of robbery in equation form as
Theft, violence (or fear of instant violence), or
ROBBERY =
Extortion + Offender Present + Fear of instant violence +
immediate delivery.
4. Punishment (S. 309 (4)).-
Imprisonment up to 10 years and fine, the punishment is prescribed for robbery
simpliciter.
5. Punishment for being a member of theft or robbery (S. 313)-
Whoever belongs to any gang of persons associated in habitually committing theft
or robbery, and not being a gang of dacoits, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment
up to seven years and fine.
III. Aggravated forms of Robbery: -
1) If robbery is committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment
may be extended to fourteen years (S. 109 (4)).
2) Attempt to commit robbery is punishable with rigorous imprisonment up to seven years
and a fine (S. 109 (5).
3) If a person voluntarily causes hurt during robbery or attempted robbery, the punishment
can be imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment up to ten years and a fine (S. 109
(6)).
4)
SYNOPSIS
I. Introduction-
DACOITY (S. 310):-
II. Definition (S. 310):-
Ingredients-
Punishment: -
III. Dacoity with Murder (S.310 (3)): -
III. Aggravated forms of ‘Dacoity’: -
3 (c)
A meets Z and Z’s child on the high road. A takes the child, and threatens to fling it down a precipice, unless
Z delivers his purse. Z, in consequence, delivers his purse. Here A has extorted the purse from Z by causing Z to be
in fear of instant hurt to the child who is there present. A has therefore committed robbery on Z.
(d)
A obtains property from Z by saying – “Your child is in the hands of my gang, and will be put to death unless
you send us ten thousand rupees.” This is extortion, and punishable as such; but it is not robbery, unless Z is put in
fear of the instant death of his child.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 177
IV. Allied Offences: -
1) Preparing to commit Dacoity (S. 310 (4)):-
2) Assembling for the Purpose of Committing Dacoity (S. 310 (5)):-
3) Belonging to a Gang of Dacoits (S.310 (6)):- .
V. Distinction between ‘Robbery’ and ‘Dacoity’:-
I. Introduction-
In the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, dacoity is an aggravated form of
robbery and is dealt with under Section 310. It is distinguished from robbery primarily by
the number of offenders involved. When five or more persons conjointly commit or
attempt to commit a robbery, the crime is classified as dacoity. This legal distinction
acknowledges the heightened danger and threat to public safety posed by a larger,
organized group of criminals acting together, which is why it carries much more severe
punishments than simple robbery, including life imprisonment or even the death penalty in
certain circumstances.
Dacoity is an aggravated form of robbery, whereas; robbery is an aggravated form
of either theft or extortion.
II. Definition (S. 310):-
(i) When five or more persons,
conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or
(ii) where the whole number of persons
a) conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, and
b) persons present and aiding such commission or attempt, amount to five
or more,
(iv) every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit
'dacoity'."
Ingredients-
For an act to be considered dacoity, the following conditions must be met:
1. The underlying offense must be robbery or an attempt to commit robbery.
2. The number of people involved, including both the perpetrators and those present
to aid in the crime, must be five or more.
3. These individuals must act conjointly, meaning they are working together with a
shared purpose to commit the crime.
Essentially, the BNS defines dacoity as a group crime, distinguishing it from robbery,
which can be committed by one person or a smaller group.
Punishment: - For Dacoity, the punishment is imprisonment for life or with
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 178
rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine (S. 310 (2)).
III. Dacoity with Murder (S.310 (3)):-
If any one of the dacoits commits murder while committing dacoity, every one of
them is punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for ten
years.
This section incorporates the principle of ‘constructive criminality.’
IV. Aggravated forms of ‘Dacoity’:-
Following are the aggravated forms of dacoity viz-.
1)
Robbery or Dacoity, with deadly weapons or cause or attempts to cause death or
grievous hurt is punishable with rigorous imprisonment for no less than seven years
(S.311).
2)
rigorous imprisonment for no less than seven years (S. 312).
V. Allied Offences:-
Attempt to commit robbery or Dacoity armed with deadly weapons, punishable with
1) Preparing to commit Dacoity (S. 310 (4)): -
The general rule is that the preparation to commit an offence is not punishable,
except in cases of preparation to commit Dacoity and preparation to wage war
against the government of India. Thus, preparation to commit Dacoity is punishable
with rigorous imprisonment up to seven years and fine.
2)
3)
Assembling for the Purpose of Committing Dacoity (S. 310 (5)):-
Assembling for the purpose of committing Dacoity is punishable with rigorous
imprisonment of up to seven years and fine.
Belonging to a Gang of Dacoits (S.310 (6)):-
Belonging to a gang of dacoits is punishable with life imprisonment or rigorous
imprisonment of up to ten years and a fine.
VI.
Distinction between ‘Robbery’ and ‘Dacoity’:-
The distinction between ‘Robbery’ and ‘Dacoity’ lies in the number of persons
involved in the offence. Robbery is Dacoity if committed by five or more persons.
5)
CRIMINAL MISAPPROPRIATION OF PROPERTY
(S. 314 and 315)
SYNOPSIS
I. Introduction-
II.
Dishonest misrepresentation of property
Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by the deceased person at the
III.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 179
time
of his death (S. 314): -
IV.
Difference between theft and criminal misappropriate
1) In theft, the object of the offender is to take property from others’ possession.
2) Moving
3) Consent
4) Previous/subsequent ‘dishonest intention’
V. Conclusion
I. Introduction-
The offence of ‘criminal misappropriation’ of the property consists of dishonest
appropriation, or conversion, of another’s property to capitalise it for one’s own use. It may
be that the possession of property might have been obtained or come innocently. However,
a subsequent change of intention (dishonest) of possession makes the possession wrongful
or fraudulent. In other words, initial possession may be valid, but due to a change in
intention, it becomes invalid, i.e., ‘criminal misappropriation’.
II. Dishonest Misappropriation of Property (S. 314): -
Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable
property shall be imprisoned for not less than six months but may extend up to two years,
and with fine.
Illustrations
(a)
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 an offence under this section.
(b)
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. Here, if A was under the impression that
he had Z’s implied consent to take the book for the purpose of reading it, A has not
committed theft. But, if A afterwards sells the book for his own benefit, he is guilty
Explanation 1- A ‘dishonest misappropriation’ for a (short) term only is a
misappropriation within the meaning of this section.
Illustration
A finds a government promissory note belonging to Z, bearing a blank endorsement.
4
(a)
A and B, being joint owners of a horse, A takes the horse out of B’s possession, intending to use it. Here,
as A has a right to use the horse, he does not dishonestly misappropriate it. But, if A sells the horse and
appropriates the whole proceeds to his own use, he is guilty of an offence under this section.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 180
A, knowing that the note belongs to Z, pledges it to a banker as security for the loan,
intending to restore it to Z at a future time. A has committed an offence under this section.
Explanation 2 - A person who finds a property not in possession of any other person
and takes such property for the purpose of protecting it or of restoring it to the owner does
not take or misappropriate it dishonestly and is not guilty of an offence but he is guilty of
the offence above defined, if he appropriates it to his own use, when he knows or has the
means of discovering the owner, or before he has used reasonable means to discover and
give notice to the owner and has kept the property for a reasonable time to enable the owner
to claim it.
What are reasonable means? or what is a reasonable time in such a case? It is a
question of fact.
It is not necessary that the finder should know who is the owner of the property or
that any particular person is the owner of it; it is sufficient if, at the time of appropriating
it, he does not believe it to be his own property, or in good faith believes that real owner
cannot be found.
Illustration
(a)
(b)
A finds a rupee on the high road; not knowing to whom the rupee belongs, A picks
up the rupee. Here, A has not committed the offence defined in this section.
A finds a letter on the road containing a bank note. From the direction and contents
of the letter, he learns to whom the note belongs. He appropriates the note. He is
It appears from the above definition and illustrations that there are the following
two ingredients of the offence: -
1)
2)
Dishonest misappropriation or conversion of property for a person’s own use
Property must be movable.
III.
Dishonest Misappropriation of Property Possessed by the Deceased Person at
the Time of his Death (S. 315): -
5
(c)
A finds a cheque payable to bearer. He can form no conjecture as to the person who has lost the cheque. But
the name of the person, who has drawn the cheque appears, A knows that his person can direct him to the
person in whose favour the cheque was drawn. A appropriates the cheque without attempting to discover the
owner. He is guilty of an offence under this section.
(d)
A sees Z drop his purse with money in it. A picks up the purse with the intention of restoring it to Z, but
afterwards appropriates it to his own use. A has committed an offence under this section.
(e) A finds a purse with money, not knowing to whom it belongs. A afterwards discovers that it belongs to
Z, and appropriates it to his own use. A is guilty of an offence under this section.
(f) A finds a valuable ring, not knowing to whom it belongs. A sells it immediately without attempting to discover
the owner. A is guilty of an offence under this section.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 181
Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use property, knowing
that such property was in possession of a deceased person at the time of that person’s
decease and has not since been in possession of any person legally entitled to such
possession, shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years and shall also be liable
to fine. If he employed the offender at the time of such person's decease as a clerk or
servant, the imprisonment may extend to seven years.
Illustration
Z dies in possession of furniture and money. Before the money comes into the
possession of any person entitled to such possession, his servant A dishonestly
misappropriates it. A has committed the offence defined in this section.
IV. Difference between ‘Theft’ and ‘Criminal Misappropriation’:-
Following are the points of distinction between ‘theft’ and ‘criminal
misappropriation’.
1.
In theft, the object of the offender is to take property from another’s possession,
whereas, in ‘criminal misappropriation’, the offender already possesses the
property.
2.
Moving: -
Moving the property is an important ingredient of theft. The initial moving
of property may be lawful, but the subsequent ‘dishonest’ intention to
misappropriate or convert the property to his own use is the offence.
Consent: -
3.
In theft, the moving of property takes place without the consent of the owner.
However, in ‘criminal misappropriation’, the possession of the property may
be with the express or implied consent of the owner.
Previous/subsequent ‘dishonest intention’:-
4.
In theft, the dishonest intention precedes the act of taking.
Whereas, in ‘criminal misappropriation of property,’ it is the subsequent
change in intention to misappropriate or convert the property for one’s own use that
constitutes the offence.
V. Conclusion-
In conclusion, both dishonest misappropriation and theft are offenses against
property, but they are distinct in their legal and factual elements. The BNS, 2023,
meticulously delineates these offenses to ensure that different criminal acts, and the
intentions behind them, are addressed with appropriate legal consequences. Understanding
the nuances, particularly the timing of the dishonest intent, is crucial for correctly applying
these provisions and is a fundamental aspect of the study of criminal law.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 182
6) CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST (Ss. 316):-
SYNOPSIS
I. Introduction-
II. Definition: -
Explanations 1 and 2: -
Entrustment of Property: -
III]
IV]
Aggravated Forms of the Offence: -
Difference between “Criminal Misappropriation of Property” and “Criminal
Breach of Trust”: -
1)
2)
3)
Receiving Property: -
Contractual Relationship: -
Conversion: -
V. Conclusion-
I. Introduction-
Criminal breach of trust is a serious offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
(BNS), 2023, defined in Section 316. It involves the dishonest misappropriation of property
that was specifically entrusted to a person. Unlike offences like theft, which involve a
wrongful taking of property from the outset, a criminal breach of trust is a violation of a
fiduciary relationship. The accused's initial possession of the property is lawful, but their
subsequent dishonest use or disposal of it, in violation of a trust or contract, constitutes the
crime. The BNS outlines varying levels of punishment based on the offender's role, with
more severe penalties for public servants and those in positions of high authority.
II.
Definition: -
Generally, any deliberate or negligent failure to implement the duties incumbent by
law on a trustee or a person in the fiduciary position is a breach of trust’.
Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property or dominion over property,
a) Dishonestly misappropriates, or
b) Converts to his own use that property, or
c) Uses or disposes of that property.
In violation of-
a) any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be
discharged. or
b) of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has
made touching the discharge of such trust, or
c) Willfully, suffers any other person so to do,
“Law Master’s Publication”
--commits ‘Criminal Breach of Trust.’
Punishment is imprisonment for five years, or with a fine or both (S. 316 (2))
Explanations 1 and 2: -
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 183
Explanation 1 and 2 to this section provide that an employer deducting an
employee’s contribution from his wages for credit to a Provident Fund or to a Family
in payment of such contribution to the said fund in violation of law, he shall be deemed to
have dishonestly used that amount in violation of a direction of law.
Illustration
(a)
A, being executor to the will of a deceased person, dishonestly disobeys the law,
which directs him to divide the effects (proceeds) according to the will and
appropriates them for his own use. A has committed a criminal breach of trust.
A is a warehouse keeper. Z, going on a journey, entrusts his furniture to A under a
contract that it shall be returned upon payment of a stipulated sum for the warehouse
(b)
Entrustment of Property:-
To constitute a criminal breach of trust, there must be an entrustment of property or
any dominion over it. Secondly, it has to be established that in respect of the property so
entrusted, there was dishonest misappropriation or dishonest conversion or dishonest use
or disposal in violation of a direction of law or legal contract by the accused himself or by
somebody else, which he willingly suffered to do. The term ‘entrustment’ implies the
handing over of the possession of a thing for some purpose, which may not imply the
conferring of any proprietary right. Entrustment may be in any manner. Thus, property was
6 Employees Provident Funds and miscellaneous Act.1952
7 Employees State Insurance Act 1948
8
(c ) A, residing in Calcutta, is an agent for Z, residing at Delhi. There is an express or implied contract between A
and Z, that all sums remitted by Z to A shall be invested by A, according to Z’s direction. Z remits a lakh of rupees
to A, with directions to invest the same in company’ paper. A dishonestly disobeys the directions and employs the
money in his own business. A has committed criminal breach of trust.
(d) But if A, in the last illustration, not dishonestly but in good faith, believing that it will be more for Z’s advantage
to hold shares in the Bank of Bengal for Z instead of buying Company’s paper, here, though Z should suffer loss and
should be entitled to bring a civil action against A, on account of that loss yet A not having acted dishonestly, has
not committed criminal breach of trust.
(e) A, a revenue officer, is entrusted with public money and is either directed by law, or bound by a contract, express
or implied, with the Government to pay into a certain treasury all the public money which he holds. A dishonestly
appropriates the money. A has committed criminal breach of trust.
(f) A, a carrier, is entrusted by Z with property to be carried by land or by water. A dishonestly misappropriates the
money. A has committed criminal breach of trust.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 184
entrusted to the director of the company, collection of land revenue by a Tahsildar handing
over partnership property to a partner, currency notes were taken by police while searching,
and a woman’s property (Stridhan) was in the hands of the in-laws’ family are all instances
of ‘entrustment’.
III]
Aggravated Forms of the Offence: -
Following are the aggravated (i.e., punishable severely) forms of offences of
‘criminal breach of trust.”
1)
2)
3)
Criminal Breach of trust by carrier, wharfinger, or warehouse keeper is punishable
for imprisonment up to 7 years and fine (S. 316 (3)).
Criminal Breach of trust by clerk or servant is punishable for imprisonment up to 7
years and fine (S. 316 (4)).
Criminal Breach of trust by a public servant, banker, merchant, or agent is
punishable for with imprisonment for life, or up to 10 years and fine (S. 316 (5)).
IV] Difference between “Criminal Misappropriation of Property” and “Criminal
Breach of Trust”: -
1)
Receiving Property: -
In ‘misappropriation,’ property comes into the possession of the accused legally or
otherwise, and he afterwards misappropriates it.
Meanwhile, in a ‘criminal breach of trust,’ the offender is lawfully entrusted with
the property, and he dishonestly misappropriates it subsequently.
2)
Contractual Relationship: -
In ‘criminal breach’ of trust, a contractual relationship exists between the parties,
whereas, in ‘misappropriation’, a contractual relationship does not exist.
3)
Conversion: -
In ‘criminal breach of trust’, there is the conversion of property held in a fiduciary
character, whereas, in ‘misappropriation’, there is the conversion of property coming into
possession of the offender anyhow.
V. Conclusion-
Criminal breach of trust, as defined in Section S. 316 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, is a robust legal mechanism for protecting the sanctity of trust in various
relationships, from personal to professional and public. By consolidating and enhancing
the previous legal provisions, the BNS provides a clear framework for prosecuting
individuals who betray their duties and dishonestly misuse entrusted property. The graded
punishments reflect a modern legal philosophy that accounts for the harm caused by such
breaches, particularly when they involve public servants or financial agents. This offense
underscores the principle that the law not only protects a person's physical possession of
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 185
property but also their right to entrust it to others without fear of a wilful and dishonest
betrayal.
7)
CHEATING (S. 318 to 420)
SYNOPSIS
I. Introduction-
II. Definition:-
Explanation: -
Punishment: -
III.
Aggravated Forms of Cheating.
Punishment: -
IV. Other sections in the BNS regarding the personation of-
V. Difference between ‘Theft’ ‘Criminal Misappropriation’, and ‘Cheating’:-
1. As to Nature:-
2. As to Property-
3. As to Possession-
VI. Conclusion-
I. Introduction-
Cheating is a pervasive form of economic crime that strikes at the heart of
transactional trust, and its updated provisions in the BNS reflect a more robust and
comprehensive approach to deterring fraudulent conduct. This note will provide a detailed
analysis of cheating as an offense under the BNS, examining its foundational elements, its
specific forms, the punishments prescribed, and its distinction from other related offenses.
II. Definition: -
S. 318 defines cheating as -
Whoever, by deceiving any person-
(a)
Fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived-
i) To deliver any property to any person, or
ii) 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’.
(b)
(c)
Explanation: -
A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.
Punishment: -
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 186
Illustration
(a)
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 cheat.
(b)
III.
A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief
that a certain celebrated manufacturer made this article, and thus dishonestly
Aggravated Forms of Cheating-
1) Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss will thereby be caused to a person
whose interest the offender is bound to protect, is punishable with imprisonment
up to five years, or a fine, or both (S.318 (3)).
2) Cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property, punishable with
imprisonment which may extend to seven years and a fine. (S. S. 318 (4)).
3) Cheating by personation (S. 319)
A person is said to cheat by personation if he cheats by -
i) Pretending to be some other person, or by
ii) Knowingly substituting one person for another, or
9 In M/s Astic Life Sciences Ltd. V/s State of Maharashtra (2008 All MR 1054).
Facts :- Accused was alleged to have cheated by breach of contract.
Held :- Mere breach of contract does not amount to an offence of cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest
intention is shown to exist from the beginning of the transaction.
10
(c) A, by exhibiting to Z a false sample of an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that the article corresponds
with the sample, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.
(d) A, by pretending payment for an article (draws) a bill on a house with which A keeps no money and by which A
expects that the bill will be dishonored, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to deliver the
article, intending not to pay for it. A cheats.
(e) A, by pleading as diamond’s articles which he knows are not diamonds, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby
dishonestly induces Z to lend money. A cheats.
(f) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him and thereby
dishonestly induces Z to lend him money, A not intending to repay it. A cheats.
(g) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to deliver to Z a certain quantity of indigo plant which he
does not intend to deliver, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to advance money upon the faith of such delivery. A
cheats; but if A, at the time of obtaining the money sends to deliver the indigo plant, and afterwards breaks his
contract and does not deliver it, he does not cheat but is liable only to a civil action for breach of contract.
(h) A intentionally deceived Z into a belief that A has performed A’s part of a contract made with Z which he has
not performed and thereby dishonestly induces Z to pay money. A cheats.
(i) A sells and conveys an estate to B. A, knowing that in consequence of such sale he has no right to the property,
sells of mortgages the same to Z, without disclosing the fact of the previous sale and conveyance to B, and receives
the purchase or mortgage money from Z. A cheats.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 187
iii) Representing that he or any other person is a person
other than he or such other person really is -
- cheats by personation’.
Punishment: - For ‘cheating by personation’, the punishment is imprisonment of
up to 5 years, or fine, or both. (S. 319 (2)).
Illustrations
(a) A cheat by pretending to be a certain rich banker of the same name. A cheats by
personation.
(b) A cheats by pretending to be B, a person who is deceased. A cheat by personation.
IV. Other sections in the BNS regarding the personation of-
1) Personation at election (S.172)
2) A public servant (S. 204)
3) Wearing garb or carrying the token used by a public servant (S.168)
4) Personation for the purposes of an act of proceeding in a suit or prosecution (S. 242)
6) An assessor (S. 268).
V. Difference between ‘Theft’ ‘Criminal Misappropriation’, and ‘Cheating’:-
There are the following differences between these three:
1. As to Nature: -
In theft, the intention is to take a movable property dishonestly out of the possession
of another person.
In ‘misappropriation’ the intention is to dishonestly misappropriate or convert to
his own use of any movable property.
In the case of ‘cheating’, the intention is to fraudulently or dishonestly induce the
deceived person to deliver any property.
2. As to Property-
In ‘theft’ and ‘criminal misrepresentation,’ the property involved is movable, whereas
‘cheating’ may take place in respect of movable as well as immovable property.
3. As to Possession-
In theft, the property is taken out of the possession of another.
In ‘misappropriation’, the offender already possesses the property.
In ‘cheating’, the victim is induced to deliver the property to the offender.
VI. Conclusion-
The BNS, 2023, has effectively streamlined the legal framework for the offense of
cheating, making it more contemporary and robust. By consolidating the fragmented
provisions of the IPC into a few clear sections, it has simplified the law and clarified the
essential elements of the crime. The tiered punishments and specific provisions for cheating
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 188
by personation and breach of duty demonstrate a legislative intent to impose harsher
penalties on those who misuse positions of trust and authority to commit fraud. As a victim-
centric law, the BNS provides greater protection for individuals and organizations from the
evolving nature of fraudulent activities, reaffirming the importance of honesty and integrity
in all societal interactions.
(.. 8…)
Receiving Stolen Property
(S. 317)
Synopsis
I. Introduction-
II. Definition and Essential Ingredients-
1. Definition-
2. The essential ingredients are:
a. Dishonest Receipt or Retention:
b. Knowledge or Reason to Believe:
c. The Property Must Be "Stolen":
III. Aggravated Forms of the Offense
1. General Punishment (Section 317(2)):
2. Receiving Stolen Property from a Dacoity (Section 317(3)):
3. Habitually Dealing in Stolen Property (Section 28317(4)):
4. Assisting in Concealing Stolen Property (Section 317(5)):
IV. Conclusion-
I. Introduction
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, places a strong emphasis on strengthening
the legal framework surrounding offenses against property. The crime of "receiving stolen
property" is a crucial component of this framework, designed to deter not only the initial
act of stealing but also the subsequent transactions that sustain the criminal enterprise.6
7
This offense, now consolidated under Section 317 of the BNS, holds individuals
accountable for their role in the chain of crime, even if they were not the original
perpetrator.8 This topic will examine the definition, core elements, and various aggravated
forms of this offense, highlighting its importance in protecting property rights and
promoting justice.
II. Definition and Essential Ingredients-
1. Definition-
The BNS provides a comprehensive definition of "stolen property" in Section 317(1).
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 189
It designates property as "stolen" if its possession has been transferred by:
1. Theft9
2. Extortion10
3. Robbery11
4. Cheating12
5. Criminal Misappropriation13
6. Criminal Breach of Trust14
This broad definition ensures that property obtained through a wide range of dishonest
means falls under the purview of this offense.15 The property ceases to be "stolen" if it is
subsequently recovered by a person legally entitled to its possession.16
17
The core offense of receiving stolen property is defined in Section 317(2): "Whoever
dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe
the same to be stolen property, shall be punished.
2. The essential ingredients are:
a. Dishonest Receipt or Retention: The accused must either receive the property from
another person or continue to retain it in their possession.19 The act must be done with a
dishonest intention, i.e., with the aim of causing wrongful gain to themselves or wrongful
loss to the rightful owner.
b. Knowledge or Reason to Believe: This is the most critical element. The prosecution
must prove that the accused either knew the property was stolen or had a "reason to believe"
that it was.21 This is often inferred from circumstantial evidence, such as the unusually low
price of an item or the lack of proper documentation.
c. The Property Must Be "Stolen": The property in question must satisfy the
definition of "stolen property" as outlined in Section 317(1).
III. Aggravated Forms of the Offense
The BNS, 2023, prescribes a tiered punishment structure for receiving stolen property
based on the severity of the original crime or the habitual nature of the offender.
5. General Punishment (Section 317(2)): For dishonestly receiving or retaining any
stolen property, the punishment is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or
both.25 This is the general offense and is applicable in most cases.
6. Receiving Stolen Property from a Dacoity (Section 317(3)): A much more
severe punishment is prescribed if the property was stolen during a dacoity (robbery
committed by five or more persons).26 The punishment for dishonestly receiving or
retaining such property is imprisonment for a term that may extend to ten years,
and the offender is also liable to a fine.27
7. Habitually Dealing in Stolen Property (Section 28317(4)): This provision targets
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 190
career criminals who operate as fences or in the black market for stolen goods.29
The offense is defined as habitually receiving or dealing in property that one knows
or has reason to believe is stolen.30 The punishment for this offense is imprisonment
for life, or imprisonment for a term of up to ten years, and a fine.31
8. Assisting in Concealing Stolen Property (Section 317(5)): This provision
criminalizes acts that aid the original perpetrator. Anyone who voluntarily assists in
concealing, disposing of, or making away with property that they know or have
reason to believe is stolen, is liable for punishment.32 The punishment for this is
imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.33
IV. Conclusion-
The provisions for "Receiving Stolen Property" under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, are a testament to the law's intention to create a comprehensive and effective legal
deterrent against property crime. By criminalizing not just the act of stealing, but also the
act of knowingly facilitating the concealment or sale of stolen goods, the BNS seeks to
disrupt the entire criminal ecosystem.34 The graded punishments based on the nature of the
crime and the offender's conduct ensure that justice is meted out in a proportionate
manner.35 The inclusion of new forms of punishment like community service for minor
theft cases and the consolidation of various provisions reflect a modern approach to
criminal law that is both stringent and reformative.
8)
MISCHIEF (S.425 to 440):-
SYNOPSIS
I]
Definition
II] Aggravated forms of mischief Aggravated forms (Ss.427-440)
I. Introduction-
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, has brought a contemporary approach to India's
criminal law by consolidating and modernizing the provisions of the Indian Penal Code
(IPC), 1860. Among the offenses re-codified in the BNS is "mischief," which deals with
the malicious destruction or damage of property. Mischief is distinct from other property
offenses like theft because the core element is not the unlawful acquisition of property, but
rather the deliberate intent to cause harm to it, thereby inflicting a wrongful loss on the
owner or the public. The BNS, in its new structure, provides a comprehensive framework
to address this offense, with a focus on proportionality and clarity.
II. Definition (S. 324 (1): -
A person commits mischief if he -
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 191
that he is likely
i)
with
the
intention to cause or knowing
to cause wrongful loss or damage to-
a) the public, or
b) any person
ii)
Causes: -
a) the destruction of any property, or
b) any such change in any property or the situation thereof, or destroys or
diminishes its utility or affects it injuriously.
Punishment: -
For mischief, the punishment is up to 6 months or a fine or both (S 324 (2)).
Explanations-
Explanation 1 states that it is not essential for the offender to intend to cause loss to the
owner of the damaged property; it is sufficient if the intent is to cause wrongful loss to any
person.
Explanation 2 clarifies that mischief can be committed against property belonging to the
person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly.
Illustration
(a)
A voluntarily burns a valuable security belonging to Z, intending to cause wrongful
loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
(b)
III.
A introduces water into an ice-house belonging to Z and thus causes the ice to melt,
Aggravated Forms of Mischief-
The following are aggravated forms of mischief: -
1. Committing mischief and thereby causing loss or damage to any property, including the
11
(c)
(d)
A voluntarily throws into a river a ring belonging to Z, with the intention of thereby causing wrongful loss
to Z. A has committed mischief.
A, knowing that his effects are about to be taken in execution in order to satisfy a debt from him to Z,
destroys those effects, with the intention of thereby preventing Z from obtaining satisfaction of the debt,
and thus causes damage to Z. A has committed mischief.
(e)
(f)
A, having insured a ship voluntarily causes the same to be cast away, with the intention of causing damage
to the underwriters; A has committed mischief.
A causes a ship to be cast away, intending thereby to cause damage to Z who has lent money on bottomry
on the ship. A has committed mischief.
(g)
(h)
A, having joint property with Z in a horse, shoots the horse, intending thereby to cause wrongful loss to Z.
A has committed mischief.
A causes cattle to enter upon the field belonging to Z, intending to cause and knowing that he is likely to
cause damage to Z’s crop. A has committed mischief.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 192
property of Government or Local Authority is liable to imprisonment of up to one year, or
a fine, or both (S. 324 (3).
2. Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of twenty
thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both (S. 324
(4).
3. If a person commits mischief and causes a loss of property amounting to or exceeding
one lakh rupees, they shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
five years, or a fine, or both. This provision details the enhanced punishment for mischief
causing significant financial damage (S. 324 (5).
4. If a person commits mischief after making preparations to cause death, hurt, or wrongful
restraint to another person, they can be imprisoned for up to five years, in addition to a fine
(324 (6)).
5. Killing or maiming any animal, which is an offense punishable with up to five years
in prison, a fine, or both. The law no longer makes a distinction based on the value of the
animal, providing uniform protection for all animals (S. 325).
6. Mischief committed with fire or explosive substances, with the punishment being up
to seven years in prison and a fine. If this act destroys a dwelling or place of worship, the
punishment can be imprisonment for life (S. 326).
7. Mischief with the intent to destroy or make a train, aircraft, or large vessel unsafe.
It is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, with harsher penalties if fire or
explosives are used (S. 327).
8. Intentional act of running a vessel aground or ashore with the explicit purpose of
committing theft. This offence is punishable with imprisonment for up to ten years and a
fine (S. 328).
IV. Conclusion-
The BNS, 2023, has made the offence of mischief more structured and aligned with modern
legal principles. By providing clear definitions, graded punishments based on the value of
the damage, and specific provisions for property of the government and local authorities,
the new law strengthens the protection of public and private property. The illustrations
provided within the statute are particularly helpful in clarifying the subtle nuances of the
offence, emphasizing that the key element is the malicious intent to cause wrongful loss.
The BNS's holistic approach ensures that acts of vandalism and property destruction,
whether against an individual or the state, are met with a proportionate and effective legal
response.
****
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 193
(..9..)
Criminal Trespass and House Trespass
I. Introduction-
II. The Basic Offense of Trespass-
1. Criminal Trespass (Section 329)-
a. Definition:
b. Punishment:
2. House-trespass (Section S. 329)-
a. Definition:
b. Punishment:
III. Aggravated Forms of Trespass-
1. Lurking House-trespass and House-breaking (S. 330)-
a. Lurking House-trespass (S. 330 (1)):
b. House-breaking (S. 330 (2)):
(i) Passage made by self or abettor-
(ii) Unauthorized route or scaling-
(iii) Opening a passage not intended by occupier-
(iv) Opening a lock-
(v) Using force or threats-
(vi) Unfastening a fastened passage-
2. Punishments for Lurking House-trespass and House-breaking (Section
331)-
a. Simple lurking house-trespass or house-breaking,
b. Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night,
c. House-trespass or house-breaking with intent to commit offence
punishable with imprisonment,
d. House-trespass or house-breaking with intent to commit offence at
night,
e. House-trespass or house-breaking after preparation for hurt, assault,
or wrongful restraint,
f. House-trespass or house-breaking at night with preparation for
hurt, assault, or wrongful restraint
g. House-trespass or house-breaking causing grievous hurt or attempt
to cause death/grievous hurt,
h. Night house-breaking with grievous hurt or attempt, by several
“Law Master’s Publication”
persons,
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 194
3. House-trespass in Order to Commit an Offense (S. 332)-
a) punishable with death,-
(b) punishable with imprisonment for life-
(c) punishable with imprisonment-,
Provided that if the offence intended to be committed is theft
4. House-Trespass After Preparation for Hurt, Assault or Wrongful Restraint (S.
333)-
5. House breaking by night (Section 334)-
IV. Conclusion-
I. Introduction-
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, has replaced the Indian Penal Code
(IPC) with a streamlined and modern legal framework. Among the many offenses re-
codified in the BNS are those related to "Criminal Trespass," which are meticulously
detailed in a series of sections. This legal classification is crucial as it protects not only the
physical boundaries of a person's property but also the sense of security and peace of mind
of the occupants. The BNS, from Sections 329 to 334, creates a clear hierarchy of offenses,
moving from a simple act of trespass to highly dangerous and clandestine acts, each with
a corresponding increase in legal consequences.
II. The Basic Offense of Trespass-
1. Criminal Trespass (Section 329)-
a. Definition:
Section 329(1) of the BNS defines criminal trespass as an act where a person either
enters or remains on another's property with a specific malicious intent. This intent can be
to commit a separate offense, or to intimidate, insult, or annoy the lawful possessor. The
offense can also be committed if the entry was initially lawful, but the person remains there
with a new criminal intent.
b. Punishment:
The punishment for criminal trespass under Section S. 329(3) is imprisonment for
up to three months, or a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or both.
2. House-trespass (Section S. 329)-
a. Definition:
This is a specific and more serious form of criminal trespass. According to Section
S. 329(2), it is committed when the trespasser enters or remains in any building, tent, or
vessel used as a human dwelling, or as a place of worship, or for the custody of property.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 195
The law clarifies that even introducing a part of the body into the structure is sufficient for
this offense.
b. Punishment:
The punishment for house-trespass under Section S. 329(4) is imprisonment for up
to one year, or a fine of up to five thousand rupees, or both.
III. Aggravated Forms of Trespass-
The BNS further distinguishes more serious forms of trespass, where the manner of
entry or the time of the offense escalates the crime's severity.
1. Lurking House-trespass and House-breaking (S. 330)-
a. Lurking House-trespass (S. 330 (1)):
A person commits lurking house-trespass when he takes precaution to conceal their
trespass from the person who has the right to exclude them. The intent is to hide the act to
facilitate the crime.
b. House-breaking (S. 330 (2)):
House-breaking occurs when a person engages in house-trespass and effects entry
into or exit from a house (or part thereof) via any of the following six ways:
(i) Passage made by self or abettor-
Entering or leaving through a passage deliberately created by the offender or their
accomplice to facilitate the trespass.
(ii) Unauthorized route or scaling-
Using a passage not intended for human entry, such as a ventilation shaft, or gaining
access by scaling or climbing over walls or other structures not meant for ingress.
(iii) Opening a passage not intended by occupier-
Entering or exiting through a passage which the offender or their accomplice has
opened for trespass, and which was not intended by the lawful occupier to be used.
(iv) Opening a lock-
Entering or leaving the property by opening any lock, whether to gain access or to
exit after committing the trespass.
(v) Using force or threats-
Effecting entry or departure by using criminal force, assaulting, or threatening any
person with assault.
(vi) Unfastening a fastened passage-
Entering or leaving via a passage that was fastened, which the offender or an abettor
has unfastened, knowing it was intended to be kept closed.
Additionally, the statute clarifies that any out-house or structure connected
internally with the main house (i.e., having immediate internal communication) is also
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 196
considered part of the house for these purposes—a vital note for legal interpretation.
Illustrations
(a) A commits house-trespass by making a hole through the wall of Z’s house, and putting
his hand through the aperture. This is house-breaking.
(b) A commits house-trespass by creeping into a ship at a port-hole between decks. This is
house-breaking.
(c) A commits house-trespass by entering Z’s house through a window. This is house-
331)-
The section lays down the punishments for aggravated forms of house-trespass and house-
breaking. The section has eight parts which deal with different situations and prescribe
increasing punishments depending on the seriousness of the offence.
a. Simple lurking house-trespass or house-breaking, the punishment may extend
to two years imprisonment and fine (Section 331(1)).
b. Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night, the punishment may
extend to three years imprisonment and fine (Section 331(2)).
c. House-trespass or house-breaking with intent to commit offence punishable
with imprisonment, the punishment may extend to three years imprisonment and
fine.
If the offence intended is theft, the punishment may extend to ten years
imprisonment (Section 331(3)).
d. House-trespass or house-breaking with intent to commit offence at night, the
punishment may extend to five years imprisonment and fine (Section 331(4).
If the intended offence is theft, the punishment may extend to fourteen years
imprisonment.
e. House-trespass or house-breaking after preparation for hurt, assault, or
12 (d) A commits house-trespass by entering Z’s house through the door, having opened a door
which was fastened. This is house-breaking.
(e) A commits house-trespass by entering Z’s house through the door, having lifted a latch by
putting a wire through a hole in the door. This is house-breaking.
(f) A finds the key of Z’s house door, which Z had lost, and commits house-trespass by entering
Z’s house, having opened the door with that key. This is house-breaking.
(g) Z is standing in his doorway. A forces a passage by knocking Z down, and commits house-
trespass by entering the house. This is house-breaking.
(h) Z, the door-keeper of Y, is standing in Y’s doorway. A commits house-trespass by entering
the house, having deterred Z from opposing him by threatening to beat him. This is house-
breaking.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 197
wrongful restraint, the punishment may extend to ten years imprisonment and fine
(Section 331(5): .
f. House-trespass or house-breaking at night with preparation for hurt, assault,
or wrongful restraint, punishment may extend to fourteen years imprisonment and
fine (Section 331(6)).
g. House-trespass or house-breaking causing grievous hurt or attempt to cause
death/grievous hurt, the punishment is life imprisonment, or imprisonment up to
ten years and fine (Section 331(7)).
h. Night house-breaking with grievous hurt or attempt, by several persons,
every participant is punishable with life imprisonment or imprisonment up to ten
years and fine (Section 331(8)).
3. House-trespass in Order to Commit an Offense (S. 332)-
Whoever commits house-trespass in order to the committing of any offence—
(a) punishable with death,- Punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous
imprisonment up to ten years, and fine.
(b) punishable with imprisonment for life- Punished with imprisonment up to ten
years, and fine.
(c) punishable with imprisonment-, Punished with imprisonment up to two years,
and fine.
Provided that if the offence intended to be committed is theft-, the term of the
imprisonment may be extended to seven years.
4. House-Trespass After Preparation for Hurt, Assault or Wrongful Restraint (S.
333)-
Whoever commits house-trespass after making preparation to cause hurt, assault,
wrongful restraint, or to put any person in fear of such harm, shall be punished with
imprisonment up to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
5. House breaking by night (Section 334)-
House-breaking by night is an aggravated form of trespass committed by breaking
into a house between sunset and sunrise. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment
for up to five years, or a fine, or both, with a more severe penalty if the intent is to commit
a serious offense like theft.
IV. Conclusion-
The BNS, 2023, provides a robust and logical framework for the offense of criminal
trespass. By clearly defining the degrees of the crime—from simple trespass to the highly
aggravated forms of house-breaking by night—the law ensures that the punishment is
proportionate to the criminal's intent, the level of intrusion, and the potential threat posed
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 198
to the occupants. The detailed sections, particularly those addressing the methods of entry
and the time of the offense, reflect a modern legal approach focused on both deterring crime
and upholding the fundamental right of an individual to the sanctity of their property.
*****
Good question . In the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, offences are divided
into chapters. Offences against property are grouped mainly in Chapter XVII (Sections
303 to 331). These provisions broadly carry forward the offences from the IPC, 1860
(Chapter XVII: Sections 378–462), but with some consolidation and re-numbering.
Here’s a structured list for you:
Offences Against Property under BNS, 2023
I. Theft (Sections 303–308)
1. Section 303 – Theft (definition).
2. Section 304 – Theft in a dwelling house, tent, vessel, place of worship.
3. Section 305 – Theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master.
4. Section 306 – Theft after preparation for causing death, hurt, or restraint.
5. Section 307 – Theft by dishonest abstraction of electricity (newly included more
clearly).
6. Section 308 – Theft in respect of computer resources (cyber theft).
II. Extortion (Sections 309–311)
1. Section 309 – Extortion (definition).
2. Section 310 – Putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt to commit extortion.
3. Section 311 – Putting a person in fear of accusation of an offence to commit
extortion.
III. Robbery and Dacoity (Sections 312–317)
1. Section 312 – Robbery (definition, includes theft/ extortion with violence).
2. Section 313 – Dacoity (robbery by five or more persons).
3. Section 314 – Making preparation to commit dacoity.
4. Section 315 – Punishment for attempting to commit robbery or dacoity.
5. Section 316 – Belonging to a gang of dacoits.
6. Section 317 – Belonging to a gang of robbers.
“Law Master’s Publication”
‘Offences Against Property’
Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 199
IV. Criminal Misappropriation and Criminal Breach of Trust (Sections 318–322)
1. Section 318 – Dishonest misappropriation of property.
2. Section 319 – Criminal breach of trust (general).
3. Section 320 – Criminal breach of trust by a public servant, banker, agent, etc.
4. Section 321 – Criminal breach of trust by clerk or servant.
5. Section 322 – Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased
person at the time of death.
V. Receiving Stolen Property (Sections 323–325)
1. Section 323 – Dishonestly receiving stolen property.
2. Section 324 – Habitually dealing in stolen property.
3. Section 325 – Assisting in concealment or disposal of stolen property.
VI. Cheating and Fraud (Sections 326–329)
1. Section 326 – Cheating (general definition).
2. Section 327 – Cheating by personation.
3. Section 328 – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.
4. Section 329 – Fraudulent deeds and dispossession of property.
VII. Mischief (Sections 330–331)
1. Section 330 – Mischief (definition – causing wrongful loss or damage).
2. Section 331 – Mischief by killing or maiming animals, destroying property, etc.
VIII. Other Property-Related Offences (scattered references)
•
•
Section 332 onwards (next chapter) deals with Criminal Trespass, House-
Trespass, Housebreaking, and related offences, which are also linked with
property.
Cyber-related property offences are now expressly mentioned (e.g., theft of a
computer resource in Section 308). `