THEFT

JIS UNIVERSITY

THEFT
LAW OF CRIMES-I

BATCH OF 2019-22

MADE BY:-
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
LLB (1st YEAR)
ROLL NO :-

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

1|Page
 THEFT

CONTENTS
A. Acknowledgement ............................................................................... 3
B. Abstract................................................................................................. 4
C. Research Questions .............................................................................. 4
D. Hypothesis ............................................................................................ 4
E. Introduction .......................................................................................... 5
F. Literature Review ................................................................................. 10
G. Background/ History ............................................................................ 10
H. Indian Perspective ................................................................................ 13

I. Conclusion/ suggestion ........................................................................ I4

J. Bibliography .........................................................................................15

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

2|Page
 THEFT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Presentation, inspiration and motivation have always played a key role in the success of any venture.
I pay my deep sense of gratitude to Dr. Souvik Chatterjee(HOD) of Juridical Department, JIS
University, Agarpara, Kolkata for encouraging me to the highest peak and for providing me the
opportunity to prepare the project. I am immensely obliged to my friends for their elevating
inspiration, encouraging guidance and kind supervision in the completion of my project. I feel to
acknowledge my indebtedness and deep sense of gratitude to my guide Mr. Aswini Bairagi whose
valuable guidance and kind supervision given to me throughout the course which shaped the present
work as it’s show. I would also like to extend my gratitude to the Vice Chancellor of JIS University
for providing me with all the facilities I needed to complete the project. So with due regards, I
express my gratitude to them.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

3|Page
 THEFT

ABSTRACT
A person may do an illegal act alone or in conjunction with other persons. When several
persons take part in doing an act, each one of such persons may act in a manner and degree,
different from others. The act may be done by one person and another may stand merely
encouraging it and ready to give any help or one person may design the act and while remaining
away from the scene of action have it executed by another. One person may persuade another to
do an illegal act, give him incitement, advice or aid and the latter may act in pursuance of such
advice and be sustained in his design by such aid. This is called .Thus, any act of an individual,
which aids, helps or assists another to commit a crime, falls within the offence of .The term in
criminal law, thus indicates that there is a distinction between the person the commission of an
offence( or abettor) and the perpetrator of the offence or the principal offender. is an offence
only if the act abetted would itself be an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code or
under any other law for the time being in force.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. Whether as an offence ought to be punished?
2. Which acts constitute abetment and which does not?
3. What is the importance of mensreain Theft?

HYPOTHESIS
Theft is an inchoate offence which involves mode of participation.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

4|Page
 THEFT

INTRODUCTION
Regulation of the administration is mandatory for the human society. It requires the protection
of not only the person as an individual but also their property. Therefore, all systems of
jurisprudence have made provision for its protection from the earliest times. Provisions for the
violation of property rights have been provided in civil law and remedies are sought by private
individual in civil court to obtain specific relief. Thus, Chapter XVII (378- 382) of Indian Penal
Code, 1860 deals with the Offences Against Property.

Theft, in layman terms means the taking of a person’s property without the consent of the
owner and Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) has provided a proper legal
definition of theft.

Section-378

Under this Section, Theft has been defined as the act of taking any immovable property with a
dishonest intent and without the consent of the owner of such property. The Section further
provides in the explanations given that any object attached to the earth would be considered as
an immovable property hence it could not be a subject of theft but once it is removed from the
earth it would become a movable property and could be stolen. The consent that must be
attained for a property to be taken without it being considered theft may either be express or
implied.

1
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
5|Page
 THEFT

Prerequisites of Theft

Dishonest Intention

Section 24 of IPC provides that dishonesty means the intention of wrongful gain or wrongful
loss. Section 23 of the IPC provides the definition of both wrongful gain and wrongful loss.
Wrongful gain means gaining any property unlawfully, the person who is losing the property is
the legal owner of such property. Wrongful loss means the loss brought about by unlawful
means.

In the case of M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. v. R. Khaishiullah Khan[1], payment for
a hire-purchase agreement defaulted and the property was seized and the court held that it
would not constitute theft as the financer was entitled to seize such property. Further, there were
no dishonest intentions.

Movable Property

Section 22 of IPC has provided the definition of movable property; means that any corporeal
property except land and things permanently attached to the earth. Only movable property can
be stolen as it is impossible to take immovable property away. Immovable property can be
converted into movable property and once it has been converted such property can be stolen.

Electricity
Electricity has been ruled to be immovable property according to the case of Avtar Singh v.
State of Punjab [2] but stealing of electricity has been made a punishable offence. The
punishment for theft is provided under section 35 of Electricity Act, 2003 as up to three years of
imprisonment with or without a fine.

2
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
6|Page
 THEFT
Data
Theft of personal data has become one of the biggest issues of the current age. Data is
intangible since it is only information thus it is incorporeal and does not come under the
definition of theft given in Section 378 of IPC. If data is stored on some tangible object like a
hard drive, then theft of such an object would be covered under this Section.

Crops
Growing crops are attached to the earth and hence cannot be considered movable property but
once they are converted into movable property by removing them from the earth, it can be
considered as theft.

Human Body
The human body cannot be considered to be movable property and hence Section 378 cannot be
applied in case of theft of human body. But in case of instances where the body has been
preserved or the skeleton has been kept, then such property is covered by Section 378 and falls
under the definition of movable property.

Property in possession

In order for theft to have occurred, the property being stolen must be taken from the possession
from the owner of such a property. If the property does not have an owner then such property
cannot be said to have been stolen if a person acquires such property. For example; if A finds a
gold nugget in a stream and he takes the gold home, it cannot be considered theft as the gold
nugget has no owner.

3
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
7|Page
 THEFT
No Consent

The property that is in question must have been taken without the consent of the owner of such
a property. The consent can either be implied or express. The consent given must also be free
meaning that such consent must not be acquired through means of coercion or fear of injury or
misrepresentation of facts.

Consent given during state of drunkenness or intoxication as well as consent given by a person
of unsound mind cannot be considered to be a valid consent.
In Pyarelal Bhargava v. State, AIR 1963, a govt. employee took a file from the government
office and presented it to B, and brought it back to the office after two days. Held that
permanent taking of the property isn’t required, even a temporary movement of the property
with dishonest intention is enough and thus this was theft.

Punishment for Theft

Punishment for theft is provided under Sections 379-382. Different punishments have been
provided for different circumstances of theft are mentioned as below:

Section 379- Punishment for theft

A person committing the crime of theft may be imprisoned for a period of time that may extend
up to 3 years or a fine or both.

Classification of Offence
The offence under this section is cognizable, non-bailable, compoundable by the owner of the
property stolen with the permission of the Court , and triable by any magistrate.

4
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
8|Page
 THEFT
Jurisdiction

As per Section 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the offence of theft may be
enquired into or tried by court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such offence was
committed or the property stolen was possessed by the thief or by any person who received or
retained the same knowing or having reason to belief it or to be stolen.

Kinds of Aggravated Theft:

Section 380- Theft in Dwelling house

A person committing theft in the dwelling-house of any human whether it be a tent, house or
vessel may be imprisoned for a period of time up to 7 years along with a fine.

Explanation : Dwelling house means a building, tent or vessel in which a person lives or
remains whether permanently or temporarily. A railway waiting room is a building which is
being used for human dwelling. Theft of articles from the roof of a house fall under this section.
[Satho Tanti vs. State of Bihar] Motive is to give greater security only to property deposited in a
house and not to the in immovable property of the person or the party from whom it is stolen.

State Amendments (State of Tamil Nadu)

Section 380 of Indian Code (Central Act XLV of 1860) (hereinafter in this Part referred to as
the principal Act) shall be renumbered as sub-section (1) of that section and after sub-section
(1) as so renumbered, the following sub-section shall be added, namely: –

5
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
9|Page
 THEFT
(2) Whoever commits theft in respect of any idol or icon in any building used as a place of
worship shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than
two years but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than two
thousand rupees.

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment
impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than two years.” [5]

Section 381- Theft by a clerk or servant in possession of master’s property

If any person who is a servant or clerk commits theft of any property owned by his master, such
person shall be punished with imprisonment of 7 years as well as a fine.

Section 382- Theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt or restraint in order to the
committing of the theft

Any person who commits theft having made preparation for death, hurt or restraint or fear of the
death, hurt or restraint for the purposes of such theft or for escape or retaining such property
shall be punished with imprisonment for a period of time up to 10 years along with a fine.

For example, A commits theft on property in Z’s possession and while committing this theft, he
has a loaded pistol under his garment, having provided this pistol for the purpose of hurting Z in
case Z should resist. A has committed the offence defined in this section.

Classification of Offences

In case of Section 380 and Section 382 of IPC, 1860 the offence is cognizable, non-bailable,
and non-compoundable. Whereas the offence committed under Section 381 of IPC, 1860 is
compoundable by the owner of the property stolen with the permission of the Court.

6
Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
2
Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
3
Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II
PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL
10 | P a g e
 THEFT

Literature Review
1. P S A Pillai’s Criminal Law 11th Edition K I Vibhute has deservedly been described as a
classic text on the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ever since the publication of its first edition in 1956.
The book says that a person who does not himself commit a crime, may however command,
urge, encourage, induce, request; or help a third person to bring it about and thereby be guilty
of the offence of .
The term in criminal law, thus indicates that there is a distinction between the person the
commission of an offenc and the perpetrator of the offence or the principal offender. In English
Law, persons who themselves are not the main offenders, but who assist or aid them, are known
as accessories. Written in a simple and lucid style and supported with rich authorities, judicial
as well as scholarly,
this latest edition will retain its decades old appeal for all persons interested in the field of
Criminal Law.

2. KD Kaur’s Criminal Law cases and Materials LexisNexis 7th Edition

is a classic work in the field of Criminal Law. The present edition has judgements of various
courts in India and abroad. This book provides that is punishable because it lead to the
commission of a crime.
a time crime would not be committed but for the aid, assistance, encouragement and support
received from others. It is not necessary for that the act should have been actually committed.
In other words, a man may be guilty as an abettor, whether the offence
is committed or not, provided the act of a man falls within the definitions of given in Section
107,IPC. There is so much of case-law and comparative studies, with edition after edition
adding to the wisdom of the book.

3. Dr. Souvik Chatterjee’s Law of Crimes Thomson Reuters is another fantastic book written
in the field of Criminal Law with an introduction to Criminology, Penology and Victimology.
This book provides for inchoate offences which are preliminary in nature and very involvement
of a man in such activities is dangerous by reason
of its close connection with the contemplated criminal act. This book is an essential companion
for practitioners, academicians and trial courts
judges, especially those at the outset of their careers.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

11 | P a g e
 THEFT

BACKGROUND/HISTORY
In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property or services without
that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of
it.The word is also used as an informal shorthand term for some crimes against
property, such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, shoplifting, library
theft, and fraud (obtaining money under false pretenses). In some jurisdictions, theft is
considered to be synonymous with larceny; in others, theft has replaced larceny.
Someone who carries out an act of or makes a career of theft is known as a thief. The
act of theft is also known by other terms such as stealing, thieving, and filching.
Theft is the name of a statutory offence in California, Canada, England and
Wales, Hong Kong, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland,and the Australian states
of South Australia, and Victoria.

The actus reus of theft is usually defined as an unauthorized taking, keeping, or using
of another's property which must be accompanied by a mens rea of dishonesty and
the intent permanently to deprive the owner or rightful possessor of that property or its
use.
For example, if X goes to a restaurant and, by mistake, takes Y's scarf instead of her
own, she has physically deprived Y of the use of the property (which is the actus reus)
but the mistake prevents X from forming the mens rea (i.e., because she believes that
she is the owner, she is not dishonest and does not intend to deprive the "owner" of it)
so no crime has been committed at this point. But if she realises the mistake when she
gets home and could return the scarf to Y, she will steal the scarf if she dishonestly
keeps it (see theft by finding). Note that there may be civil liability for
the torts of trespass to chattels or conversion in either eventuality.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

12 | P a g e
 THEFT

INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Suresh Ganpati Halvankar v. The State of Maharashtra & ors.- In this
recent case, Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has categorically
stated that interference or maliciously injuring meters under Section 138 of
the Electricity Act is theft of electricity and hence a compoundable offence
under Section 152 of the Electricity Act .

The Supreme Court while holding that theft of electricity is a compoundable

offence made the following observations in the case:

 That Section 135 of the Electricity Act and Section 138 of the
Electricity Act, which impose a maximum sentence of three years,
both deal with theft of electricity.
 That the High Court has taken a very narrow view of Section 152 of
the Electricity Actby stating that an offence of theft is related stricto
senso[1] to Section 135 of the Electricity Act since that section alone
deals with the offence of theft, but would not specifically refer
to Section 138 of the Electricity Act which only indirectly relates to
the offence of theft.
 That Section 138 would also be so subsumed as the language
of Section 152 of the Electricity Actspecifically states ……”an offence
of theft”which according to Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary, as well as
Ramanatha Iyer’s Law Lexicon, states that one meaning of ‘an’ is
‘any’. If the word ‘any’ is substituted for the word ‘an’ in Section
152 , it becomes clear that any offence relating to the theft of
electricity is also within the ken of Section 152 .
 Section 138 of the Electricity Actalso relates to theft of electricity, be
it through maliciously injuring meters, and is therefore also
within Section 152 , and can therefore be compound.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

13 | P a g e
 THEFT

Conclusion
Theft, in law, a general term covering a variety of specific types of stealing, including the crimes
of larceny, robbery, and burglary.
Theft is defined as the physical removal of an object that is capable of being stolen without the consent of the
owner and with the intention of depriving the owner of it permanently. The thief need not intend to keep
the property himself; an intention to destroy it, sell it, or abandon it in circumstances where it will not be
found is sufficient. Automobile theft, for example, frequently involves selling the stolen car or its parts. In
some instances an intention to deprive the owner of the property temporarily also is sufficient, as in the case
of stealing a car for a “joyride” and then abandoning it in such a way that the owner is able to reclaim it.
Larceny is the trespassory taking and carrying away of personal goods from the possession of another with the
intention to steal. For larceny to occur, three conditions must be met:
 the goods must be removed from the possession of another without the owner’s consent;
 the goods must not only be taken but also “carried away,” a requirement that is highly formalistic and
is satisfied by any movement of the entire object, however slight; and
 there must be an intention to steal, which is ordinarily defined as an intention to deprive the owner
permanently of his property. The unauthorized borrowing of another’s property is not larceny if there
is an intent to return the property, nor is larceny committed by someone who takes goods in the
mistaken belief that they are his own property.

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

14 | P a g e
 THEFT

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Harris’s Criminal Law (22nd Edn., Reprint 2000)
 Stephen’s Digest of Criminal Law Act, 373
 Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Law of Crimes, Vol. II

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

15 | P a g e