This case is analyzed by Sujata Porwal, third year BA LLB (Hons.) student at Symbiosis Law School, Pune.
Case Number
Review Petition (Crl.) Nos. 446-447 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1174-1175 of 2019
Equivalent Citation
1963 AIR 1094, 1963 SCR Supl. (1) 689
Bench
K. Subbarao, J.
Decided on
22nd October, 1962
Relevant Act/ Section
- Constitution of India – Article 136
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 24
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 3
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 109
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 23
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 24
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 378
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 379
- Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) – Section 465
Brief Facts and Procedural History
The appellant was a Superintendent in the Chief Engineer’s office who was charged under Section 379 of IPC. He was accused of removing a file from the Chief Engineer’s office to deliver it to a friend (co-accused). The co-accused substituted certain documents and returned the file the next day.
Later, upon being threatened by the Chief Engineer, he gave a confession that was later retracted. The petitioner challenged the order of the Hon’ble court that convicted the accused, but set aside the charges against the co-accused.
Issues before the Court
- Whether Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act can be interpreted in order to extend its scope?
- Whether the act of taking something out of the possession of a person and returning it later would constitute as ‘theft’ under Section 379 of IPC?
Ratio of the Case
The hon’ble court concluded that theft can be temporary as well as permanent in nature. The court expanded the scope of the definition of theft as mentioned in the existing acts by stating that temporary or permanent unlawful possession of any movable property that causes material or immaterial wrongful loss shall be considered as theft.
The scope of opinion in matters of induced or coerced confessions under S. 24 of Evidence Act was expanded to introduce flexibility in deciding upon such matters.
Decision of the Court
The court chose a different path to adjudge the matter by laying down points of distinction over the conclusion of facts. The court believed that the officer was working in the capacity of an officer and not officer-in-charge. Thus, he cannot be held to be the one in legal possession of the file.
Besides, the definition nowhere expresses that the dispossession must be permanent in nature in order to constitute theft and hence the bench held that the conditions pre-requisite for the crime of theft are fulfilled in the present case. The Hon’ble judges further disregarded the arguments of the petitioner thereby holding that wrongful loss can constitute ‘the loss of any property that is lost by an unlawful means to which the person at loss is legally entitled to’.
Latest Posts
- Legal News Analysis Internship Programme: Lexpeeps Pvt Ltd.
- Legal Research Internship Programme: Lexpeeps Pvt Ltd.
- Internship Opportunity at RAD & Partners
- The Evidence of the Prosecutrix stands at a higher pedestal and needs no Corroboration: Bombay High Court
- The order passed by HC while exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is cryptic: Kerala High Court
- Call for papers: E-Conference by School of Law, Bennett University
- Internship Opportunity with Dr. Vasudeva
- Value Added Course on Criminal Law by Department of Law, MAIMS
- Gujarat National Law University’s Short Term Certificate Course
- Law of Limitation
- Sex work and activism in India
- Internship Opportunity at Precinct Legal
- CLAT-Peeps! (10)
- Current Affairs (2)
- competitions (117)
- Conferences and Seminars (164)
- Course and Workshops (78)
- Debates (39)
- Eassy Competitions (52)
- Fellowships & Scholarships (48)
- Guest Blogs (6)
- important (26)
- Internships and Jobs (1,616)
- interviews (8)
- moot court (136)
- Opportuintes (1,788)
- Job Opportunity (665)
- opportunity (1,745)
- Call for papers (357)
- Quizes,fests and others (239)
- Work Opportunity (386)
- Our Blog (938)
- Administrative Law (15)
- ADR (13)
- Arms Act (2)
- Case Analysis (188)
- Company law (35)
- Constitutional Law (125)
- Consumer Protection Act (15)
- Contract Law (56)
- CPC (9)
- Criminal Law (124)
- Cyber Law (12)
- Environmental Laws (26)
- Evidence Act (20)
- Family Law (7)
- General (180)
- International Humanitarian Law (7)
- International law (21)
- IPR (9)
- Jurisprudence (12)
- labor laws (5)
- Maritime Laws (1)
- Partnership Act (2)
- personal law (31)
- Taxation (9)
- Tort (61)
- Transfer of Property (2)
- Our Services (9)
- career advice (2)
- others (4)
- Top Stories (306)
- Uncategorized (662)
Archives
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019