Section 403-409 I.P.C.
Section
403
Criminal
Misappropriation of Property
According to section
403 I.P.C. a person commits, “criminal misappropriation” if he –
(i)
Dishonestly misappropriates or coverts
to his own use,
(ii)
Any movable property. For example –
(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 misappropriates 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 book for the purpose of reading it, A has not committed theft. But A
afterwards sells the book for his own benefit, he is guilty of an offence under
the section.
(c)
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.
Thus, it is clear from
the examples (a), (b) and (c), that the original innocent taking amounts to
criminal misappropriation.
Explanations – Section
403 provides two explanations:
Explanation
1 –
A dishonest misappropriation for a time only is “misappropriation” within the
meaning of Section 403.
Explanation
2 –
A person who finds property not in the possession of any other person, and
takes such property for the purpose of protecting it for, or of restoring to
the owner does not take or misappropriate it “dishonestly”, is not guilty of
the offence; but he is guilty of the offence , if he appropriates it to his own
use, when he knows 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
means’ or what is a ‘reasonable time’ in each case, is a question of fact.
Hence essentials of
Criminal Misappropriation of Property – According to Section 403, there are two
essentials of criminal misappropriation of property –
1.
Dishonest misappropriation or conversion
of property for a person’s own use; and
2.
Such property must be movable.
Case
Laws –
1.
Emp. Vs. Raza Hussein
– A and B were about to travel by the same train from Benares City. A has a
ticket for Ajudhia. B had two tickets for Benares Cantonment. A voluntarily
handed over her ticket to B in order that he might tell her if it was right. B,
under the pretence of returning A’s ticket, substituted therefore one of his
own, and kept A’s ticket. It was held that B was guilty of criminal
misappropriation rather than cheating.
2.
A, a servant in the Postal Department,
while assisting in the sorting of letters, secreted two letters with the
intention of handing them over to the delivery peon and sharing with him
certain money payable upon them. Under section 408 of the Indian Postal Offices
Act, it is an offence to secret a postal article. A’s intention is to share the
money payable upon the letters. He is, therefore, guilty of theft as a servant
and of attempt to commit misappropriation of property.
Section
405
Criminal
Breach of Trust
Whoever being in any
manner entrusted with
(a)
Property or
(b)
Dominion over property – dishonestly
(1)
Misappropriates, or
(2)
Converts to his own use, or
(3)
Uses or disposes of that property in
violation of any –
(a)
Direction of law prescribing the mode in
which such trust is to be discharged; or
(b)
Legal contract (express or implied),
which he has made touching the discharge of such trust – or willfully suffers
any other person so to do, commits “criminal breach of trust”
Illustrations –
(a)
A, being executor to the will of a
deceased person, dishonestly disobeys the law which directs him to divide the
effects according to the will, and appropriates them to his own use. A has
committed criminal breach of trust.
(b)
A is a warehouse-keeper. Z, going on a
journey, entrusts his furniture to A, under a contract that it shall be
returned on payment of a stipulated sum of warehouse room. A dishonestly sells
the goods. A has committed criminal breach of trust.
Essential of Criminal
Breach of Trust
1.
The accused was entrusted with property
or with dominion over it;
2.
That he dishonestly
(i)
Misappropriated it, or
(ii)
Converted it to his own use, or
(iii)
Used it, or
(iv)
Disposed it of;
3.
That s/he or some other person at his
instance did so in violation of Any direction of law prescribing the mode in
which trust is to be discharged, or any
legal contract (express or implied) which he had made touching the discharge of
such trust.
Note: To constitute an
offence of criminal breach of trust, there must be dishonest misappropriation
by a person, in whom confidence is placed.
Section
406
Punishment
for Criminal Breach of Trust
Imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with
both
Section
407
Criminal
Breach of Trust by Carrier etc
Whoever, being
entrusted with property as a carrier, wharfinger or warehouse keeper, commits
criminal breach of trust, in respect of such property shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description which may extend to seven years and shall
also be liable to fine.
Section
408
Criminal
Breach of Trust by Clerk or Servant
Whoever, being a clerk
or servant or employed as a clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted
in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property, commits
criminal breach of trust in respect of that property shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable
to fine.
Section
409
Criminal
Breach of Trust by Public Servant
Whoever, being in any
manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property in his
capacity of a public servant or in the way of his business as a banker,
merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent, commits criminal breach of trust
in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or
with imprisonment of either description which may extend to ten years and fine.
Section
415
Cheating
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
(b)
Intentionally induces the person so
deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not to 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”.
Hence, cheating can be
done in two ways, but the “deception” element is the essential in both the
ways.
Illustrations:
(1)
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 cheats.
(2)
A, by putting a counterfeit mark on
article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that this article was made by a
certain celebrated manufacture, and thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay
for article. A cheats.
(3)
A by exhibiting to Z a false sample of
an article, intentionally deceives Z into believing that the article
corresponds with the sample, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay
for the article, intending not to pay for it, A cheats.
(4)
A by pledging as diamonds articles which
he knows are not diamonds, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly
induces Z to lend money, A cheats.
(5)
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.
Thus,
it is clear that cheating is not necessary intended to deceive any particular
individual rather it can be intended to any one in particular as mentioned in
illustrations (3) and (4) and a promise as to future conduct not intended to be
kept is also cheating as in illustration (5).
Case
Laws:
1.
Dwarkanath Ghos, 20 W.R. Cr. L.J. 49 –
The accused obtained a genuine signature upon a false document by inserting the
document in a heap of paper placed for signature before the person signing it.
The accused was charged with forgery. The court held that the accused was
guilty of cheating, and not of forgery.
2.
Sukhdeo Pathak, 19 Cr. L.J. 209 – A goes
to a Railway Station and obtains admission to the platform pretending that he
is a C.I.D. officer, without purchasing a platform ticket. A would be guilty of
cheating.
Section
416
Cheating
by Personation
Whoever, cheats by;
(1) Pretending
to be some other person, or
(2) By
knowing substituting one person for another, or
(3) Representing
that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person
really
is
referred as “Cheating by Personation.”
Examples;
1. A
cheats by pretending to be a certain rich banker of the same name. A cheats by
personation.
2. A
cheats by pretending to B, a person who is deceased. A cheats by personation.
Section
417
Punishment
for Cheating
Imprisonment for either
description which may extend to one year or with fine or with both
Section
418
Cheating
with Knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender
is bound to protect
Whoever, cheats with
knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender is
bound to protect either by law or by legal contract, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description which may extend to three years or with fine
or with both.
Section
419
Punishment
for Cheating by Personation
Imprisonment of either
description which may extend to three years or with fine or with both
Section
420
Cheating
and dishonestly inducing delivery of property
Cheating and dishonesty
inducing delivery of property or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any
part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which
is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description which may extend to seven years and with fine.
Comments
Post a Comment