Criminal Intimidation and Other Related Offences (SEC. 503-510)

CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION AND
SUBMITTED BY-
OTHER RELATED OFFENCES PURAV MEHTA
5th SEM. B.A.LL.B. ‘C’
(SEC. 503-510) 153/19
CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION
• Intimidation putting a person in fear with a view to convince that person to do
or restrain from doing some act.
• The offence is defined under section 503 IPC.
• Essential Ingredients-
1. Threatening a person with any injury-
(a) to his person, reputation or property or;
(b) to the person or his reputation, in whom
that person in interested.
2. The threat must be with intent-
(a) to cause alarm to that person, or
(b) to cause that person to do an act which he is not legally bound to do, or
(c) to cause that person to omit to omit to do a particular act which he is legally
bound to do.
SEC. 503- interpretations
• Explanation- threat to injure reputation of deceased person in whom person is
interested is included in this section.
• Shri Vasant Waman Pradhan vs. Dattatraya Vithal Salvi (2004)
Intention  soul of criminal intimidation  needs to be gathered by the facts and
circumstances.
• Romesh Chandra Arora vs. State (1960)
Accused threatened a person and his daughter, of injury to reputation by releasing a
indecent picture of the girl unless money was paid to him. Intent- to cause alarm.
• Doraswamy Ayyar vs. King-Emperor (1924)
If the person who threatens is incapable of putting the threat to execution, then he
cannot be held liable for the offence. Eg. Threat of punishment by God.
SEC.503- CASE LAW
Amulya Kumar Behera vs. Nabhagana Behera(1995) (Orissa HC)
Facts- The complainant, in this case, argued that he was abused in a filthy language
by the accused and if the witnesses had not intervened, he would have suffered more
injuries apart from a fist blow from the accused. The complainant admitted that he
was not alarmed by the threat given by the accused.
Held- Court examined the meaning of the term ‘alarm.’ The Court held that the mere
expression of any word without any intention to cause alarm was not sufficient.
Hence, the Court held that since an essential ingredient of the offence was missing,
no case could be established.
Punishment for Criminal
Intimidation
SECTION 506-
1. When you commit criminal intimidation, you will be imprisoned for a term of two
years or a fine or both. (non-cognizable, bailable, and compoundable offence)
2. If the threat is to cause:
•Death or grievous hurt,
•Destruction of any property by fire,
•To cause an offence to be committed which is punishable with imprisonment up to a
term of seven years, life imprisonment or death,
•To attribute unchastity to a woman.
for a term extending to seven years or a fine or both.
(bailable, non-cognizable and non-compoundable)
Aggravated Forms of Punishment
SECTION 507-
•This section covers instances wherein intimidator commits the offence anonymously.
•It has been stated that whoever indulges into the act of criminal intimidation by
anonymous communication or takes precautions to conceal his identity or abode, shall
be punished with imprisonment which may extend up to two years, in addition to
punishment provided under Section 506.
•Bailable, non-cognizable, and non-compoundable offence.
•Example: If a person anonymously writes a letter to a person X, in which he threatens
that he will burn X’s house, then this is an offence under this Section.
Aggravated Forms of Punishment
SECTION 508-
•Essential Ingredients-
1. Voluntarily causes or attempts to cause any person to perform act which he is not
legally bound to do or overlooks to do any act which he is legally eligible to do.
2. By the way of inducing or attempting to induce the person.
3. To believe that if he does not complete the act, then either the person or in whom
he is interested, will be rendered an object of Divine displeasure.
•imprisonment for a duration that can extend to one year or fine or both.
•Bailable, non-cognizable, and compoundable offence.
•Example- The messages forwarded on numerous social media platforms to share a
specific text to twenty other people or refrain from something, otherwise a Divine
entity would impose pain or any other way of divine displeasure.
SEC. 504- INTENTIONAL
INSULT
• Intentional insult by a person with intent to provoke breach of peace.
1. Intentionally insulting and provoking a person.
2. Person insulting must intend or know that such insult is likely to break public
peace or commit any other offence.
• Imprisonment of either description, which may extend to two years or fine or
both.
• Fiona Shrikhande vs. State of Maharashtra (2013)
Intentional insult must be of such a degree that it should
provoke a person to either break the public peace or
commission of any other offence. Merely abusing does
not satisfy the ingredients of the offence.
Cases- Section 504
• Ram Chandra Singh vs. Nabrang Rai Barma (1998) (Orissa HC)
Complainant stated that the accused had built a boundary wall over his roof. When
the complainant protested, he was abused with filthy language. The Court held
that whether mere abuse would amount to an offence is dependent on various
factors such as the status of the parties, the nature of abuse and several other
factors. The Court held that such words are normally used by the parties in petty
quarrels and hence did not amount to an offence under this provision.
• K. Veerangaiah vs Katta Mark (1976) Cr.L.J. 1690(Andhra Pradesh HC)

The term ‘insult’ means to either treat with offensive disrespect or to offer an
indignity to the person. The court has to see what would be the effect of the
language used in ordinary course of events and not how the complainant actually
behaved. Merely because a man of cool temperament did not break public peace,
would not follow that no offence was committed.
SEC. 505- PUBLIC MISCHEIF
Section 505(1)- Any person with intention and voluntarily makes publications or
circulations-
(a)regarding facts on any defence officer from the navy, army, and air-force likely to
cause revolt or on the failure of performance of his duty.
(b)stating any panic or fear among citizens of the State or on such reference a person
tends to perpetrate any misdeed towards the State shall be punished with
imprisonment for a period that may be extended to three years or with a fine or maybe
with both.
(c)Which likely cause actions to provoke any race or community of persons and it
leads to any offence opposed to other class or race or community.
Penalty- imprisonment for period which may extend to 3 years or fine or both.
(Non-cognizable, non-bailable and non-compoundable).
SEC. 505- PUBLIC MISCHEIF
• Section 505(2)- Any person who makes, publishes or circulates any statement or
report which contains a rumour or alarming news on grounds of religion, race,
place of birth, residence, language, caste and community, for creating or
promoting, or which is likely to create or promote, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-
will among various religious, racial, linguistic or regional groups or castes or
communities.
Penalty-Imprisonment which may extend to 3 years or fine or both.
• Section 505(3)- If the aforementioned offence is committed by any person in a
place of worship or in any assembly that is engaged in the performance of religious
worship or religious ceremonies.
Penalty- Imprisonment which may extend to 5 years and fine.
• Exception to Section- Person has reasonable grounds to believe that such
statement, rumour or report is true and he published it in good faith and without
any malice or intention.
Sec. 505- CASE LAWS
• Kalicharan Mohapatra vs. Srinivasa Sahu (1959) (Orissa HC)
Although the provision is a definite restriction on the freedom of speech and
expression, the offence committed should be construed in the favour of the
defence. The Court held that legitimate display of grievances by means of
publication of pamphlets, which some sections of the public may have against
the authorities, cannot be brought under the ambit of this provision.
• Manzar Sayeed Khan vs. State of Maharashtra (2007)
Apex Court observed that merely inciting the feelings of one group or community
without any reference to some other group or community, cannot be brought
under the ambit of Section 505(2). It further emphasized that the effect of words
should be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded and
courageous men. The perspective of weak and vacillating minds cannot be
considered
Insulting Modesty of a Woman (SEC.
509)
• Article 51(A)(e) of Constitution  all the citizens of the country should strive to
renounce practices which are derogatory to the women in India.
1. Intention to Insult the modesty of a woman.
2. The intention must be caused by-
(a) Uttering any word, making any sound or gesture or exhibiting any object,
intending that it will be seen or heard by the woman.
(b) intruding upon her privacy.
1. Burden to prove that it was intended by the
accused  Prosecution.
1. Penalty- Simple imprisonment for 3 years with
fine. (Bailable, Cognizable and Compoundable
with permission of court).
SEC. 509- CASE LAWS
• Emperor vs. Tarak Das Gupta (1925)
The accused sent a letter to a nurse, with whom he had no previous acquaintance, which
contained indecent overtures. The accused was held liable for outraging the modesty
of a woman by exhibiting the object. The Court held that it was not necessary that the
offender themselves should exhibit the object. An agent, such as the post office, can
also be employed for fulfilling this purpose.
• Mrs Rupan Deol Bajaj & Anr. vs. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill (1995).
The complainant, a senior IAS officer, alleged that, in a party hosted at a colleague’s
house, the accused, who held the post of the Director-General of Police, Punjab
slapped her back and behaved indecently with her in front of the gathering. The Apex
Court held that the ultimate test for ascertaining if the modesty has been outraged – if
the actions of the offender could be perceived as such which are capable of shocking
the sense of decency of a woman. The Court held the accused guilty of the offence.
SEC. 510- Misconduct by Drunken
Man
1. Appearance in state of intoxication in-
(a) any public place.
(b) any place where it is trespass in him to enter.
2. Conducts himself as to cause annoyance to any person.
• Penalty- Simple Imprisonment for 24 hours or Rs.10 fine or both.
(Non- Cognizable, Bailable and Non- Compoundable).
• No Mens Rea is required.
THANKYOU

Criminal Intimidation and Other Related Offences (SEC. 503-510)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Intimidation and Other Related Offences (SEC. 503-510)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Intimidation and Other Related Offences (SEC. 503-510)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION AND

• K. Veerangaiah vs Katta Mark (1976) Cr.L.J. 1690(Andhra Pradesh HC)

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.