Types of Offences in Indian Criminal Law

The article has been authored by Ms. K. Yuganthara, a 5th year law student from Sastra University, Thanjavur, Tamilnadu. She is currently interning with LatestLaws.com

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) is a comprehensive code intended to cover the substantive aspects of criminal law. It has broadly classified the offences into Offences against the human body, State, property, inchoate offences, statutory offences, etc. The article aims to briefly discuss the categories of offences along with some significant judgments on the same.  

1. OFFENCES AGAINST THE HUMAN BODY

1. CULPABLE HOMICIDE

The word Homicide finds its root in Latin, where “homo” implies man and “cide” means killing. It is thus the act of killing a man, either through lawful or unlawful means. Section 299 of the IPC states Culpable Homicide as, “Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.”  

Thus, the following essential elements are to be satisfied for an offence of Culpable Homicide- 

(a) There is an act done by the Accused. 

(b) The act was done with an intent to kill/ or cause bodily injury that is likely to result in death, or knowledge that such an act is likely to cause death. 

(c) The result of such action caused the death of the victim. 

In the case of Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab[1]a man who killed one of his relatives was being chased by a few people. He jumped into the well to save himself and died in the process. It was observed that since the action of the Accused was not done with any intent or knowledge as stated in Section 299 of the IPC, he could not have been convicted. 

2. MURDER

Section 300 deals with the act of Culpable Homicide amounting to murder for which the following conditions need to be satisfied: 

(a) It is done with the intent of causing death. 

(b) It is done with the intention to cause bodily injury which the offender knows is likely to cause death.

 (c) It is done with an intent to cause bodily injury which is intended to be inflicted and is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 

 (d) The person has the knowledge that the act is dangerous enough to cause death or bodily injury, and still commits it. 

The Section further goes on to state the exceptional circumstances where a culpable homicide does not amount to murder. 

1. An act committed under grave and sudden provocation. If the offender does any act under grave and sudden provocation by losing his/her ability to control their actions, it does not amount to murder. 

The Supreme Court laid down certain guidelines in the case of K.M. Nanavati v. State of Bombay[2] to be satisfied to take advantage of this exception. Some of the guidelines were that the words or actions must be capable of causing unexpected provocation, causing any prudent man to react in the same manner and the nature of the victim’s act must be considered.

2. When the act exceeds the limits prescribed by law in the exercise of the right of private defence in good faith.
3. Public Servant exceeds the power. 
4. Causing death in a sudden fight, without any premeditation. 
5. If the person who is killed is over the age of 18 years and suffers death with his/her own consent. 
6. DOWRY DEATH

Section 304B of the IPC deals with dowry death. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar[3] to constitute an offence under this Section, it needs to be proved that the woman died of burns or other physical injury or otherwise under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage. It needs to be established that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or relatives of the husband soon before her death and such cruelty was in connection with the demand of any dowry. 

In the case of Bachni Devi v. State of Haryana[4] , it was propounded that the demand for any property connected with the marriage constitutes dowry. The term “soon before death” varies based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The demand for dowry must be the continuing cause of the death of the woman. But it does not necessarily mean that it should be immediately before her death as observed in the case of Satbir Singh and another v. State of Haryana[5]. 

4. HURT

Hurt may be simple or grievous. Section 319 of the IPC defines hurt as causing bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person. In the case of Marana Goundan v. Unknown[6], the accused was found guilty of causing bodily harm when the victim died as a result of the injury caused in the abdomen due to the acts of the accused. Section 320 establishes the circumstances where the offence will be categorized as grievous hurt. 

5. WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT/RESTRAINT

According to Section 340 of the IPC, whoever wrongfully restrains any person from proceeding beyond any circumscribed limits, is said to wrongfully confine that person. In the case of Deep Chand v. State of Rajasthan[7], the victim was forcefully and wrongfully confined by the accused for 17 days and was asked to write letters to his father for ransom. The accused were booked for causing wrongful confinement. Section 339 of the IPC states that no person can prevent another person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed. 

In another case of Raja Ram v. State of Haryana[8], a 13-year-old child and his mother were summoned to the police station for questioning. It was held to be a violation of Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which states that no woman or child under the age of 15 years should be summoned to the police station for questioning. The accused was found guilty of unjust restraint. 

6. CRIMINAL FORCE AND ASSAULT

Criminal force as defined in Section 350 of the IPC is analogous to ‘battery’, which implies the intentional infliction of force by one person on another without their assent. The force must be caused with the intention to cause injury, fear, or annoyance to the other person. Section 351 deals with assault. It is the act of the accused where he makes a gesture to use criminal force in the presence of the person against whom it is made which the intention that such gesture will cause apprehension in the mind of the victim. It further has a physical impact on the victim.

7. KIDNAPPING

Kidnapping infringes upon Article 21 of the Constitution restricting an individual’s freedom. Section 359 of the Indian Penal Code states that kidnapping from India is committed when one person transports any person beyond the limits of India without the consent of that person or any person authorised on his behalf. Section 361 is concerned with the kidnapping of a minor from a lawful guardian, without the consent of the guardian. 

In the case of S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras[9] a minor girl, about to reach majority willingly left her house to marry the accused in the registrar’s office. No offence was said to be committed under this section as there was no proof that the accused took her out of her parents’ legal care. Section 362 of the Indian Penal Code states abduction as an act of forcible compulsion, inducement by deception with an intention to remove that person from any location. 

8. CRIME AGAINST WOMEN

Section 354 of the IPC covers the acts perpetrated on a woman which aim to outrage her modesty. In the case of State of Punjab v. Major Singh[10], it was held that the test to determine an offence of outraging the modesty of women is not by the age of the women. Even a child’s modesty can be said to be outraged. The Criminal Law Amendment Act (2013) expanded the scope of the section by introducing specific acts as offences that are committed against women. These offences are: 

1. SECTION 354A - Sexual harassment

A man shall be punished for any of the following acts. 

(1) For showing unwelcomed and explicit sexual overtures. 

(2) Request for sexual favours.

 (3) Exposing a woman to porn against her will.

(4) Maxing sexual comments. 

In a significant ruling in the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan[11], the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has a basic right to be free from sexual harassment at her workplace. It even laid down guidelines to prevent the same.

2. SECTION 354B- Disrobing

A person shall be punished if he forces any woman to undress without the will of the woman. 

3. SECTION 354C- Voyeurism

When any man watches or captures the image or video of a woman engaged in a private act, where she would not be expected to be observed, is liable to be punished under this provision. 

4. SECTION 354D- Stalking. 

When a woman is being followed constantly despite her evident indifference, either physically or through the internet, email, or any other form of electronic communication, commits the offence of stalking. 

9. RAPE

Sexual intercourse with women must be with the consent of the woman. When the ingredients under Section 375 are fulfilled, an offence of Rape is said to be committed. Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code deals with gang rape. 

The ingredients for constituting the offence of rape under Section 375 are: 

(1) Against her will. 

(2) Without her consent. 

(3) With her consent, but by putting her in fear of harm or death. 

(4) With her consent, however, she believes that the man is her lawful husband, even though the man knows that he is not her husband. 

(5) With her consent, when she is not able to understand the consequences of the actions due to intoxication, incapacity, etc. 

(6) With or without the consent of the female, if she is below the age of fourteen years.  

In the case of Tulshidas Kanolkar v. State of Goa[12], it was expounded that the consent of a mentally retarded girl is not valid consent due to the incapacity of understanding the consequences of the action. 

In another case Pradeep Kumar v. Union Administrator[13], the Supreme Court opined that to prove an offence under Section 376D, the following elements must be established well by the prosecution:

(1) There was a common intention among a group of persons to commit rape on the victim. 

(2) There was a pre-arranged plan to participate in a concert in the commission of rape. 

(3) The act of rape has been committed by one or more persons of the group in furtherance of the common objective. 

But it need not be proved that everyone was involved necessarily. A mere presence of a person without a meeting of minds is not sufficient to prosecute a person, since the common intention is the essence of culpability. 

10. UNNATURAL OFFENCES

Section 377 of the IPC states that no person can have carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal. It deals with the acts of sodomy, bestiality, buggery, etc. On a bare perusal of the Section, consent seems to be irrelevant. A person taking a passive role is guilty same as the person who actively participates in the act. 

The constitutionality of this Section was challenged in the case of Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi [14]. It was argued that the basic fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15,19, and 21 of the Constitution are being violated when consensual sexual intercourse happens between two adults in private. Section 377 was declared partially to be unconstitutional in this case. It was held that a non-consensual act between same-sex adults would still be an offence under the section. But, as far as consenting sexual action of adults is concerned, criminalising such acts is a violation of fundamental rights. 

The dictum of this case was rejected by the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Kumar Kaushal v. Naz Foundation case.[15]

Again, in the year 2018, the Supreme Court in the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India[16] having again heard this matter, decriminalised all consensual sex among adults, including homosexual acts. The Section, however, still holds non-consensual sexual acts between humans and animals as illegal. 

2. OFFENCES AGAINST PROPERTY

1. THEFT

A dishonest intent to take any movable property out of the possession of a person without his/her consent is an offence of theft under Section 378 of the IPC. The mere intention to take property out of the possession of the victim is not an offence. The actual removal of property is a necessary element to establish an offence under this section. 

In the case of K.N. Mehra v. State of Rajasthan [17] it was enunciated by the Supreme Court that to prove dishonest intention, it is not necessary to prove that permanent deprivation of property. The essential elements to commit an offence of theft are the non-consent of the person and the presence of a dishonest intention at the time of taking the property. 

2. EXTORTION

The main ingredients of extortion under Section 383 of the IPC are intentionally putting a person in fear of injury and dishonestly inducing a person to make him deliver his valuable security or his property to another person. 

In the case of Gurucharan Singh v. State of Punjab[18] it was held that even if the amount demanded is paid after a span of few days, it still amounts to extortion under the Indian Penal Code.

3. ROBBERY

Section 390 of the IPC provides that a robbery is an act involving either theft or extortion. 

1. Theft becoming Robbery 

A theft becomes robbery when the offender does any of the acts- 

(1) Voluntarily causes, attempts to cause death, hurt or wrongful restrain to any person. 

(2) Voluntarily causes fear of instant death, hurt, or wrongful restraint to the other person. 

These, when coupled with an act of theft, amount to robbery.

2. Extortion becoming Robbery

An act of Extortion becomes robbery when the offender does any of the acts- 

(1) Puts the person in fear of instant death, hurt, or wrongful restraint.

 (2) Induces a person by putting him in fear to deliver his property or valuable security. 

4. DACOITY

Section 391 of the IPC deals with dacoity. When five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit an act of robbery, it is said to be dacoity. 

As stated in the case of Amrish Devnarayan v. State of Gujarat[19], the following elements are necessary to prove an offence of dacoity- 

(1) There should be an involvement of five or more persons. 

(2) The attempt to commit/ or the actual commission of the offence should be conjoint. 

5. CRIMINAL MISAPPROPRIATION OF PROPERTY

Misappropriation under Section 403 of the IPC means any dishonest appropriation or use of any other person’s property. The property must be movable property belonging to the complainant. 

In the case of Ramaswami Nadar v. State of Maharashtra[20], it was expounded that ‘converts to his own use’ in Section 403 of IPC implies that the property is used by the accused in derogation of the rights of the owner of that property. 

6. CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST

As per Section 405 of the IPC, the essential elements of committing an offence under this Section are- 

(1) Entrustment of property by one person to another. 

(2) Offender uses the property for his use. 

(3) He fraudulently disposes or uses the property in violation of the law in which the prescribed manner is given to discharge the trust. 

(4) There should be a presence of dishonest motive. 

In the case of Shiv Sagar Tiwari v. Union of India[21], it was opined that a minister holds public property in the position of trustee and thus he must deal with that property in a just and fair manner. Any failure to do so will make him liable under this provision.

7. RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY

Section 410 of the IPC states that to constitute an offence under this Section it must be proved that the person having possession of the property was a stolen property through means of theft, extortion, robbery, etc. The transfer of property, breach of trust, or misappropriation of the property may be within India or outside India. 

In the case of Nagappa Dhondiba v. State[22], the stolen ornaments of a deceased woman were recovered within thirty days of her death based on the information given by the accused. The Court made the accused liable under Section 411 of the IPC. 

8. CHEATING

When any person deceives another by making him believe what is not true and dishonestly causes a wrongful loss to make a wrongful gain by fraudulently inducing the other person to deliver their property, to cause damage to the mind, body, property or reputation, is said to commit an offence under Section 415 of the IPC. 

In the famous case of Sushil Kumar Datta v. State of West Bengal[23], the accused was convicted of the offence of cheating when he got selected in an exam due to false representation by projecting himself as if he belonged to the SC caste in an IAS examination.

9. MISCHIEF

Section 425 of the IPC deals with the offence of mischief. Mischief is said to be committed when a person destroys any property which thereby diminishes its value coupled with an intention or knowledge to cause wrongful loss to the public. 

In the case of Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. and Ors[24], it was propounded that to prove an offence under this section, the ownership or possession of the property is not an essential element. 

10. CRIMINAL TRESPASS

When any person unlawfully enters into a private property belonging to another person, without his prior permission, he is said to commit an offence of trespass under Section 441 of the IPC. The unlawful stay must be with a mala fide intention. 

In the case of Punjab National Bank Ltd. v. All India Punjab National Bank Employees[25], the Supreme Court differentiated between knowledge and intention. In this case, bank employees went on a pen-down strike. The management contended that if the employees do not wish to do their jobs, they would be considered trespassers. The Bench held that workers intended to fulfil their demands but there was no intention to annoy the officials. Thus, no offence under this Section was said to be committed. 

3. INCHOATE OFFENCES

The presence of inchoate offences became significant with the change in time, especially when the English jurists included such offences in law. It is a precautionary method to stop the commission of crimes in society by making furtherance of a crime an offence. It includes offences such as abetment, attempt, and conspiracy. 

1. ABETMENT

When a person persuades, instigates, or aids another person to commit a crime, without himself committing the offence is said to abet the other person. It is dealt with under Sections 107 and 108 of the IPC. Abetment can be by incitement, conspiracy, illegal omission, or through assistance. 

2. ATTEMPT

An attempt has not been defined anywhere in the Indian Penal Code expressly. But attempt to commit a crime means any direct movement towards the committing of a crime after the preparation stage is completed. In this stage, the actual commission of an offence has not taken place, yet the attempt to commit an offence is also an offence. It is dealt with under the IPC in three different ways-

a. In some cases the commission of the offence and its attempt are dealt with under the same section with the same amount of punishment, as in Sedition dealt under Section 124A of the IPC.

b. In a few cases, it is dealt with as a separate offence and punishment is also differently accorded. For example, Section 307 deals with the attempt to murder, Section 309 deals with the attempt to suicide, and Section 308 deals with the attempt to culpable homicide. 

c. Third case is where it is not covered under both the above categories. For instance, in Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, the punishment is imprisonment for life or simple imprisonment for committing such an offence. 

3. CONSPIRACY 

A conspiracy is another type of an inchoate offence where the parties agree to commit an illegal act and takes steps in furtherance to complete the commission of the crime. Section 120A and 120B deals with criminal conspiracy. The act should be committed by two or more persons with an agreement to commit an illegal act or a legal act through illegal means. Since this is an inchoate offence, it doesn’t require the completion of the offence. 

4. STATUTORY OFFENCES

These are those offences, in addition to the crimes discussed above, such as alcohol-related crimes, drug crimes, traffic offences, and white-collar crimes. These offences are included with the intention to prohibit people from indulging in such activities and in the hope to deter the individuals from engaging in them. Some other financial offences like fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, cybercrimes, etc are also punishable under Indian criminal law.