Skip to main content

Kidnapping and Abduction with relevant case laws

 Kidnapping and Abduction with case laws (Offences against human body)



Kidnapping and abduction is mentioned in Section 359-374 of IPC
Section 359 of IPC speaks about two kinds of kidnapping :
Kidnapping from India and kidnapping from lawful guardianship.

Section 360 of IPC speaks about kidnapping from India .

It means carrying or taking away a person and such taking away should be beyond the limitations of India or outside the territorial borders of India without the consent of that person or a person’s legally authorised person.
The intention in this base of offence is not considered. Kidnapping from India would account to offence , no matter what the intention of the person is.

Section 361 of IPC speaks about kidnapping for lawful guardianship.

It means taking away a person or compelling a person of less than 16 years of age in case of male ,18 years of age in case of female and a person of unsound mind to come along by deceitful means viz by communicating false advantages he/she would get if the agreed to be taken to place or by offering pleasure to the person .
For example – Mr. Antonio offered sweets to random child he met on the streets in lieu of coming along with him.
It would amount to kidnapping from lawful guardianship if the child Is taken away without the consent of lawful guardianship. Children till they attain the age of maturity as stated legal are under the guardship of parents or guardian appointed by the court or who has the custody of the child.
There’s an exception to this – If such an act is done in good faith basically without any ill intention (Thinking that he is the father of illegitimate child).
An offence becomes complete if there is mens rea as well actus rea in both thee above mentioned section .

Section – 362 speaks about Abduction
It says that whoever by forceful means moves a person from one place to the other without the consent of that person can be accounted as abduction of that persom. It also says whoever by deceitful means (by offering false advantages or stating untrue facts) convence a person to move to another place would also account to abduction.
Abduction itself is not an offence , until and unless all the essential elements mentioned above does not exist , it won’t amount to abduction.
Abducting applies to every age group.

Case law
In the case of , S Varadarajan v. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942
This case screens what taking away in section 360 and 361 depicts

In this case the girl in question was about to attain the age of majority when she left her father’s house voluntarily to get married to a boy. The accused person is the boy whom she married at the registered office. Here there was nothing to prove as the girl voluntarily left the house and the boy did not have any role to persuade the girl to do so. hence it would not amount to offence under section 361.


Case law : Ramji Vittal v. State 

This case clearly highlights “ taking away without consent of guardian”

So , In this case the female child was a minor and the parents got divorced in which the mother got the legal guardianship of the daughter or say custody of her daughter.

The divorced husband without the consent of the mother took away his daughter from the school .This would amount to offence committed of kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more