Threatened scandalous cross-examination can amount to injury under extortion law, and an appeal from acquittal was maintainable.

A threat to use cross-examination with irrelevant, scandalous, indecent, or insulting questions to obtain money was treated as a threat of injury because "injury" extended to harm to reputation and the threatened conduct was prohibited by law. The court also held that the Government's appeal from acquittal was maintainable under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since the provision was not confined to cognizable offences. The acquittal was reversed and the conviction for extortion by threat was restored.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a threat to conduct cross-examination by asking irrelevant, scandalous, indecent, and insulting questions, in order to obtain money, amounted to putting a person in fear of injury within Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) Whether the Government's appeal against the acquittal could be entertained under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure notwithstanding the nature of the offence.

Issue (i): Whether a threat to conduct cross-examination by asking irrelevant, scandalous, indecent, and insulting questions, in order to obtain money, amounted to putting a person in fear of injury within Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code.

Analysis: The legal meaning of "injury" extended to harm to reputation, and "illegal" included conduct prohibited by law. The Evidence Act permitted cross-examination only on relevant facts and empowered the Court to forbid indecent, scandalous, insulting, or needlessly offensive questions. A threat to use such prohibited conduct in order to extort money was therefore a threat of injury within the statutory definition.

Conclusion: Yes. The accused's conduct constituted the offence under Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code.

Issue (ii): Whether the Government's appeal against the acquittal could be entertained under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure notwithstanding the nature of the offence.

Analysis: Section 417 conferred a right of appeal from acquittal without restricting it to cognizable offences. The suggested limitation found no support in the statutory wording.

Conclusion: Yes. The appeal was maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The acquittal was reversed and the conviction was restored with a higher sentence for the offence of extortion by threat.

Ratio Decidendi: A threat to do an act prohibited by law, including the use of irrelevant, scandalous, or insulting questions in cross-examination, is a threat of injury for the purpose of extortion under Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code.

---