Browse by Stream
QnA
Home
QnA
Go To Your Study Dashboard

Get Answers to all your Questions

header-bg qa
  • Home
  • Law
  • Read the following passage and answer the question Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code defines the offence of theft, meaning the dishonest remova

Read the following passage and answer the question
Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code defines the offence of theft, meaning the dishonest removal of movable property out of the possession of any person without his consent. An act does not amount to the offence of theft under the Code unless there is not only no legal right but no legal appearance or colour of a legal right. By the expression ‘colour of legal right’ is meant not a false pretense but a fair pretense, not a complete absence of claim but a bona fide claim, however weak. In India, under the Hindu law, a husband and a wife can be liable for theft against each other. For instance, the husband is liable for the theft, if he takes away the stridhan property of his wife, which is her exclusive property as per various judgments of the Court. Intention is the gist of the offence. The taking will not amount to theft unless the intention with which it is taken is dishonest. In the judgment of Queen Express v Sri ChurunChungo, I (1895) ILR 22 Cal 1017, if a creditor takes a moveable property out of a debtor’s possession without his consent, with the intention of coercing him to pay his debt, this constitutes the offence of theft under the Penal Code. Where a partner in a business did not know that he was endorsing a cheque and believed that he was merely signing a piece of paper which he gave to the accused, even though the property for which the cheque was endorsed did not pass to the accused by reason of endorsement, but remained with the complainant, the accused was held guilty of dishonestly appropriating the property. It cannot be laid down as a general principle of law that a partner can in no circumstances commit theft of the partnership property.
Question
Which of the following is recognized as a valid element under the offence of theft of the Indian Penal Code?


 

 

 

Option: 1

The property that has been dishonestly taken by the accused must be capable of being stolen.


Option: 2

The accused must possess the dishonest intention to permanently deprive the person of such a property.

 


Option: 3

All of the above

 


Option: 4

None of the above

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

As per the provision of theft enshrined under Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code, where any person with the dishonest intention removes any moveable property out of the possession of any person, then the erring person is said to have committed the offence of theft. This provision of theft is different from the offence of theft in the English Law. The English Law mandatorily requires that the property that has been dishonestly removed by the accused must necessarily be capable of being stolen, and the accused must have the dishonest intention to permanently remove the victim out of the possession of such a property. These requirements are not recognized as valid conditions in Indian law.

 

Posted by

HARSH KANKARIA

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

CLAT 2025 Hearing LIVE: Delhi HC seeks response from Consortium in 2 weeks; next hearing on April 7
anam-khan

CLAT PG counselling 2025 dates soon for LLM; category-wise expected cut-offs for top NLUs
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 counselling likely to begin after Delhi HC hearing on March 3; selection process explained

Latest Question