Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the proceedings under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the ground that no property or money had been delivered, and whether delivery of property is an essential ingredient of the offence under Section 387.
Analysis: The offence of extortion under Section 383 differs from the offences under Sections 385, 387 and 389, which punish the stage of putting a person in fear for the purpose of extortion even where extortion is not completed. Section 387 covers putting or attempting to put a person in fear of death or grievous hurt in order to commit extortion, and the delivery of property is not a necessary ingredient. Penal statutes must be strictly construed, but the provision cannot be narrowed by importing an ingredient that the text does not require. The complaint disclosed prima facie allegations that the complainant was threatened at gunpoint to compel payment, which was sufficient to attract Section 387 and made the quashing order unsustainable.
Conclusion: The order quashing the proceedings was erroneous, and the complaint was not liable to be quashed on the ground that no money was actually delivered.
Ratio Decidendi: For an offence under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, actual delivery of property is not required; it is sufficient if a person is put or attempted to be put in fear of death or grievous hurt in order to commit extortion.