Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
The principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: In criminal law, misappropriation is the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one's own use or other unauthorized purposes, particularly by a public official, a trustee of a trust, an executor or administrator of a dead person's estate or by any person with a responsibility to care for and protect another's asset s. Embezzlement is misappropriation when the funds involved have b een lawfully entrusted to the embezzler. On the contrary, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property or services without that pers on's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.
Facts: A went for swimming at the Municipal Swimming Pool. A handed over all his valuables, including some cash to X, the guard on duty for safe custody, as notified by the Municipality. After swimming for an hour, A came out and searched for X. He found another guard on duty and that guard informed A that X had gone home after completing his shift and did not hand over anything to be given to A. A registered a complaint with the police. X was traced but he told the police that he sold all the valuables and the entire cash was used for drinking liquor. What offense, if any, was/were committed by X?
Options
If at all X is liable, it is for criminal misappropriation only.
X is liable for criminal misappropriation and embezzlement.
X is not guilty of criminal misappropriation as he did not make any personal gain out of those items with him.
X is liable for theft as he took A’s property without X’s permission
Advertisements
Solution
X is liable for criminal misappropriation and embezzlement.
Explanation:
According to Section 403 of the Indian Penal Code, when an individual dishonestly converts another person's movable property to his own, there is misappropriation of property. According to the given facts, X had the responsibility to care and protect valuables and cash of A. X dishonestly misappropriates and sells A's possessions and uses the cash to drink liquor. (Narayan Singh v. State of MP [1986 CrLJ 1481])
X will also be held under Embezzlement because of A lawfully entrusted his property i.e. the valuables and cash in the possession of X which were misappropriated by X.
X will not be held under theft because A himself handed over his property (valuables and cash) to X and thus there was implied consent of A.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Direction: The passage given below is followed by a set of question. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.
On May 14, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select a private agency for creating a National Database of Sexual Offenders for India. The said RFP states that the purpose of establishing the database of sex offenders is to help in the early detection and prevention of crime against women, arrests of persons accused of criminal offences and to keep a watch on habitual offenders. Media reports suggest that the public will have access to the details regarding convicted sex offenders and law enforcement officials will have access to data about persons on trial for sexual offences. This registry seems to be one more knee-jerk and populist reaction to the problem of sexual violence against women and children in India.
The ministry seems to have launched this initiative without analysing the evidence on the limited efficacy of such registries in other jurisdictions in reducing rates of repeat offending and without examining its appropriateness in the Indian context. Various states in the US have had such publicly accessible registries for around 28 years and multiple studies have shown that they have limited public safety benefits and significant social costs. Sex offender registries are predicated on the assumption that convicted sex offenders have a high likelihood of committing offences after serving their sentences. This assumption is not borne out by data. In India, the percentage of recidivism among arrested persons according to data collected by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) for 2016 is only 6.4%.
The registry is being proposed in response to widely-reported horrific incidents of rape. The logic seems to be that if the police have a list of offenders living in the area, investigation becomes simpler and people, especially parents, can be more vigilant if they are aware of offenders living around them. However in India, as per the NCRB data for 2016, in 94.6% of reported cases of rape against women and children, the perpetrator is known to the victim. Such a registry offers little protection from such offenders. In fact, the fear of the offender being included in the registry may exacerbate the problem of underreporting by making people apprehensive about reporting sexual violence involving family members and acquaintances.
Once the general public has unfettered access to data about sex offenders online, it can open a Pandora's Box. The fears of offenders being ostracised and vilified become very real. Among a host of foreseeable problems, they will find it particularly tough to find employment or housing. India has already witnessed cases of lynchings of people suspected to be child kidnappers. It is not paranoid to expect the public reaction to convicted offenders to be much worse. Once offenders are pushed into the margins, their access to treatment, supervision and support systems becomes diminished, which may be quite counterproductive. If the state imposes restrictions on where such offenders can live, the housing crisis they will face will be exacerbated. They may become homeless or be compelled to live in areas far from home where they may face less scrutiny. The stigma and ostracisation that such offenders will face will invariably extend to their families. Studies in the US have shown that a combination of social ostracisation, lack of psychiatric support and the inability to find a job or housing, can even increase chances of recidivism; thus, defeating the very purpose of the registry. In such circumstances, registration in such a database can turn into a 'scarlet letter' like badge of shame that can punish offenders much beyond their sentences and make their rehabilitation and reintegration into society next to impossible.
As per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) data from 2015-2016, we know that 85% of cases of sexual violence against women, which excludes cases of marital rape and assault, go unreported. Such a registry does not begin to address this problem.
Before implementing this registry, the Ministry of Home Affairs must create a research base on recidivism among sex offenders and the risk factors and hold a much broader public debate on the need for the registry. This is not to say that sexual offences are not an urgent problem. In the Indian context, the focus needs to be shifted to tackling barriers to reporting, training law enforcement officials and providing support to survivors rather than this ill-conceived registry.
The author gives which of the following suggestions to the concerned ministry?
Principle: A man is guilty of not only for what he actually does but also for the consequences of his doing.
Facts: A wanted to kill the animal of B. He saw B standing with his animal and fired a gunshot at the animal. The gunshot killed B.
Principle: Oral evidence must always be direct i.e. of the person who says he saw the event and hearsay evidence is no evidence.
Facts: X was told by Y (whom X trusts) that Z has murdered A.
The member of a State Public Service Commission can be removed on the ground of misbehaviour only after an enquiry has been conducted by the
Nothing is an offence which is done by a child of –
Wrongful gain' means
Under section 45 of IPC, life denotes
An accused is entitled to statutory bail (default bail) if the police failed to file the charge-sheet ___________ within of his arrest for the offence punishable with 'imprisonment up to 10 years'.
Principle: Whoever intending to take dishonestly (with an intention to cause wrongful loss to another or wrongful gain to himself) any moveable property without that person's consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft. (Common for Q. No. 18 and 19) A had lent his watch to B for a period of a month. Two days after he had done so, he walked into B's office to find the watch on B's table. He decided to take the watch back. A was prosecuted for theft.
A handed over his watch to B for safekeeping. B sells the watch to C, which he was not authorised to do. B is prosecuted for theft.
