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 removal of movable property out o

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
Identify the correct option for the following two statements of Assertion (A) and Reasoning (R).
Assertion (A):  Where a person removes the property of any person with the intention of causing wrongful loss to that person and wrongful gain to himself, then he has committed the offence of theft.
Reasoning (R): The dishonest removal of a moveable property out of the custody of a person is an offence against possession and not against ownership.

 

Option: 1

Both (A) and (R) are correct; and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)

 


Option: 2

Both (A) and (R) are correct; but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)

 


Option: 3

(A) is correct, but (R) is incorrect

 


Option: 4

(A) is incorrect, but (R) is correct

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

As per the provision of theft stipulated under Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code, when a person dishonestly removes any person out of the possession of his property, without the consent of such person, then the person is liable for the offence elaborated under this provision. It is implied that the conduct of the erring person is to cause the wrongful loss to the victim and wrongful gains to himself, through the act of keeping the victim out of possession of the moveable property. It is thus considered as an offence against possession and not against ownership. Even though both the statements are correct, the latter cannot be considered as the reason of the former statement as the former statement defines the existence of dishonest intention, while the latter statement explains the scope of the offence.

 

Posted by

shivangi.bhatnagar

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

CLAT 2025 Admit Card (OUT) Live: NLU CLAT hall ticket at consortiumofnlus.ac.in; how to download
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 admit card out at consortiumofnlus.ac.in; exam pattern, timings
anam-khan

IIULER Goa to admit students through CLAT; joins NLU consortium

Latest Question