Keywords- ipc section 380,section 380 ipc, section 380 in the Indian penal code,section 380 ipc punishment, section 380 ipc compoundable or not,section 380 ipc bailable or not
When we read about crimes occurring all throughout the nation, we often consider the underlying causes that may contribute to these kinds of crimes in our society. We also consider whether the effects of societal ills can inevitably lead to a rise in the number of crimes. A human may commit a specific offence for a variety of reasons in many situations, such as poverty or unemployment, but there are also psychological factors that may be involved, such as greed, wrath, or jealousy.
section 380 in the Indian penal code
- According to ipc section 380, anyone who commits the crime of “theft” in a structure, tent, or vessel that has been used as a “human dwelling” or as a “custody” of property is subject to penalty under the contested Section.
- For example, A, a friend of B, would be considered to have violated this clause if he visited her home and took a cup that was left on her dining room table without asking permission or obtaining her knowledge.
Ingredients:
- Immovable property is the target of theft.
- Someone was in possession of it.
- The accused wanted to relocate it in an unethical manner.
- Either the person did not know about it or the accused did it without their consent.
- With the aim of removing, it from the person’s possession, the accused took action.
- The property that was taken came from a structure, a tent, or a vessel that was utilized as a place to live or store property.
section 380 ipc punishment
- According to the fundamental tenet of criminal jurisprudence, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. To enable the same, it needs to present strong evidence that persuasively supports its position.
- The following is the punishment outlined in section 380 ipc: A person found guilty of violating the contested section faces a maximum sentence of seven years in simple or harsh prison, as well as a fine. When someone is sentenced to severe imprisonment, they are required to work hard while incarcerated, but under simple imprisonment, they may be required to complete basic activities.
Is section 380 ipc compoundable or not?
- Compoundable offenses are those that can be resolved with mutual consent. While the matter is pending trial, the parties may mutually agree to reach a compromise. This is known as “compounding,” and the offenses for which this is acceptable are referred to as compoundable offenses. Further trials are stopped in this process. Compoundable offenses are typically limited to less serious crimes that do not endanger the peace in society or the welfare of the state.
- Because section 380 ipc offences tend to be terrible and may affect the welfare of the state, they are not compoundable.
Is section 380 ipc bailable or not?
- In legal parlance, bail is a short-term release of an accused person on the requirement that a certain amount of money be paid in order to harass them. More serious crimes are typically not subject to bail, while minor offenses are. It also depends on the accused’s role, including whether or not he works for the government.
- There is no bail for section 380 ipc.
section 380 ipc: Case Rulings
- In the case of Ratna Alias Ratan Lal and Anr. v State of Rajasthan, the victim’s house lock was broken by a few unidentified individuals. Many objects made of gold and silver were allegedly stolen from that location. The report then said that the total value of the stolen items and money was Rs. 64,000.
After the accused were found to have stolen items during the inquiry, they were charged under the virtue of Section 454 and Section 380 of the IPC. They received sentences of two years and five years of rigorous imprisonment, respectively, in addition to a fine of Rs. 2,500.
- In the case of Anjani Gupta v State (NCT of Delhi), the son of the respondent and the petitioner were married in a formal ceremony. It was claimed that the petitioner suffered abuse and harassment for the dowry shortly after being married. The petitioner was additionally degraded by her in-laws, who not only demanded a dowry but also tortured her for other reasons. In the current matter, the respondent filed a complaint under the virtue of Section 380 of the Code, claiming that the petitioner had pilfered letters and other documents that were believed to have been in his possession while he was away from home. According to the Delhi High Court, there has to be prima facie evidence in order for a case to be established under this section.
No evidence of dishonesty on the petitioner’s part can be proven in the preliminary phase. Therefore, the requirements of Section 380 were not met since the petitioner’s conduct does not infer the fact that the petitioner had an ulterior motive. The petition was therefore granted.
Not only does seizing someone else’s property and denying them possession without their consent violate their rights, but it also is a criminal crime that should never be tolerated. They ought to get the appropriate punishment if found guilty of the same.
