Q Define and distinguish between theft and extortion?

Extortion is the offence carried out by overpowering the will of the owner, while theft is the offence which is committed without the consent of the owner. The offence of extortion occupies a middle place between theft and robbery.
2. Relevant Provisions:
Following are the relevant provisions of P.P.C regarding the concerned topic.
Section 378 and 379 for theft
Section 383 and 379 for Extortion
3. Theft U/Sec 378:
Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person ‘s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.
(i) Ingredients Of Theft:
In order to constitute theft, following factors are essential.
(i) Dishonest intention to take property
(ii) Property must be moveable
(iii) That should be in possession of other person
(iv) There must be removal or moving of that property
(v) Without consent of the owner
(Explanation of these ingredients have been give in the question difference between theft and criminal breath of trust)
(II) punishment U/Sec 379:
Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to there years or with fine or both.
Case Law
2000 MLD 651
It was held that person found guilty of offence of theft u/s 397 can not Simultaneously be convicted u/s 411 of P.P.C
4. Extortion U/sec 383:
Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person or to any other and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put deliver to any person any property or valuable security or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security,commits extortion.
(I) Ingredients:
Following are the ingredients of extortion
(i) Fear of Injury
There must be intentionally putting a person in fear of injury to himself or another. Injury implies illegal harm, and it maybe of any kind.
Illustration:
‘A’ threatens ‘B’ that he will keep ‘A’s child in wrongful confinement unless ‘A’ gives him certain amount of money. ‘A’ has committedextortion.
(ii) Dishonest Inducement:
The element of dishonesty is the essence of the offence of extortion. There can be no extortion unless a person is by threat of injury dishonestly induces to security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into valuable security.
Illustration:
‘A’ by putting ;Z’ in fear of grevious hurt, dishonestly induces ‘Z’ to sing or affix his seal to a bland paper and deliver it to ‘A’. ‘Z’ sings and delivers the paper to ‘A’ Here as the paper so signed may be converted into a valuable security ‘A’ has committedextortion.
a. To Any Person:
It is not necessary that the threat should be used and the property received by one and the same individual. A threat may be made by some and the property received by other persons, and they all will be guilty ofextortion.
(II) Punishment U/Sec 384:
Whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both.
5. Difference Between Theft And Extortion:
(I) As To Consent:
In extortion, consent is obtained by putting the person in possession of property in fear of property in fear of injury to himself or any other person.
In theft, the offender’s intention is to take the property without the owner’s consent.
There is no element of force in theft.
(II)Property:
In Extortion , both moveable and immoveable property may be the subject of the offence. In theft it is limited only to moveable property.
(III) Element Of Force:
There is element of force in the offence of extortion as the property is obtained by putting a person in fear of injury to that person or any other.
There is no element of force in theft.
(IV) Scope:
Extortion is wider in scope as it coved any kind of property, valuable security or anything that may be converted into valuable security.
Theft covers only the cases of moveable property.

(V) Taking Of Property:
In extortion, threat may be by one person and the property may be received by anther person.
In theft, property must be move by person in order to such taking.
(VI) Effect:
In extortion, the property is delivered.
In theft, there is dishonest removal of property.
6. Conclusion:
To Conclude, I can say, that the offence of theft and extortion are offence against property. Extortion is the offence which occupies a middle place between theft and robbery as the element of force is present in this offence, which is missing in the offence of theft.

Download in PDF 

Q. Define criminal justice? What are different theories of punishment?(2002)(2001)(2001/A)(2005/A)
Q. What are various theories of punishment? Discuss fully.(2004/S)(2006/A)(2007/A)
1. Introduction:

 The most essential functions of a state are. Primarily two. War and administration of justice. Administration of justice is classified into parts, civil justice and criminal justice. The purpose of criminal justice is to punish the wrong doer who is punished by the state, on the question whether the purpose of punishment is the desire to make men better or to protect society, certain theories have been given by different jurists.

2.Meaning Of Punishment:

Punishment may be regarded as a method of protecting society by reducing the occurrence it as an end it self.
3.Meaning Of Criminal Justice:
Criminal justice is that which dealt within criminal proceeding the object of criminal justice is to punished the wrong doer.
(I)Purpose Of Criminal Justice:
The purpose of criminal justice is to punish the wrongdoer by the state. From very ancient times, a number of theories have been given concerning the purpose of punishment which may broadly be divided into classes.
(i) The view of first class is that, the end of criminal justice is to protect and add to the welfare of the state and society.
(ii) The view of other class in that, purpose of punishment is retribution.
4. Objectives Of Punishment:
Following are the objectives punishment
(i) Supremacy of law.
(ii) Maintenance of peace in society.
(iii) Punishment of offender.
(iv) Protection of public from crime.
(v) Protection of state.
(vi) Preservation of life.
(vii) Protection of individual property.
(viii) Upkeep morality and culture
(ix) Prevention of crime.
5.Theories Of Punishment:
There are certain theories behind the concept of punishment.
(I)Deterrent Theory:
According to this theory, the object of criminal justice in awarding punishment is to deter the people from committing crimes again.
According to Prof Salmond:
“Punishment is before all the deterrent and the chief end of the law of crime is to make the evil-doer an example and a warning to all that are like-minded with him.”
According to Locke:
“The commission of every offence should be made bargain for the offender:
(i)Aim of Punishment:
The aim of punishment is not revenge but terror. An exemplary punishment should be given to the criminals so that the others may learn a lesson from him.
Manu states:
“Penalty keeps the people under control.”
Criticism:
There is a lot of criticism of the deterrent theory of punishment in modern times.
Excessive hardness of punishment tends to defeat its own purpose by arousing the sympathy of the public towards those who are given cruel punishments.
Deterrent punishment is likely to harden the criminal instead of creating in him the fear of law.
Punishment loses its horror once the criminal is punished.
(II)Preventive Theory:
In preventive theory, the offender are disabled from repeating the offences by such punishment such as imprisonment, death, exile etc. This theory dose not act so much on the motive of the wrong-doer but disables his physical power to commit the offence.
Prof. paton states:
The preventive theory concentrates on the prisoner but seeks to prevent him from offending again in the future.
Example:
An example of preventive punishment is the cancellation of the driving licenses of a person.
Criticism:
This theory has been criticized on following aspects.
It hardens the first offender by putting him in constant association with the habitual offenders.
When offender puts in jail, it breeds move crime.
(III)Reformative Theory:
According to this theory, the object of punishment should be the reform of the offender. Even in he commits a crime, he dose not cease to be a human being. He must be educated and taught some art of industry-during the period of his imprisonment so that he may be able to start his life again after his release from jail.
Prof. Jennings Stated:
“Punishment not the revenge but to reform the offender.”
Criticism:
The view of Salmond on the reformation theory that if criminals are to be sent to prison to be means formed into good citizens, prisoner must be turned into comfortable develling place. The theory of reformative punishment alone is not sufficient and there should be a compromise between the deterrent theory and the reformative theory and the deterrent theory must have the last word.
(IV)Retributive Theory:
In primitive times, punishment was mainly retributive. The person wronged was allowed to have his revenge against the wrong-doer the principal of “an eye for an eye ”a” tooth for a tooth” was recognized and followed. The plato was a supporter of the retributive theory.
Prof. kant Stated:
“Judicial punishment can never serve merely as a means to further another good, whether for the offender himself or for society, but must always be inflicted on him for the sole reason that he has committed a crime.”
Criticism:
Critics points out to punishment in itself is not a remedy for the mischief committed by the offender. It merely aggragates the mischief. Punishment is itself is an evil and can be justified only on the ground that it is going to yield better results.
(V)Expiative Theory:
This theory is similar to the idea of retribution. Expiation means the suffering or punishment for an offence. To suffer punishment is to pay a debt due to the law that has been violated.
Lilly Stated:
“The wrong whereby he has transgressed the law of right, has incurred a debt. Justice requires that the debt be paid, that the wrong be expiated.”
Criticism:
Justice Holmes writes “This passion of vengeance is not one which we encourage, either as private individuals or as law-makers”.
(VI)Compensatory Theory:
According to this theory, the object of punishment must be not merely to prevent further crimes but also to compensate the victim of the crime. The contention is that the mainspring of criminality is greed and if the offender is made to return the sill-gotten benefits of the crime, the spring of criminality would dry up.
Criticism:
This theory has been criticized on the following points:
It tends to over simply the motives of crime. The motives of crime is not always economic.
Even in cases of offences actuated by economic motives the economic position of the poor offender may be such that compensation may not be available.
If the offender is a rich person the payment of any amount may be no punishment for him.
(VII)Denunciatory Theory:
This theory examines the crime from a moral point of view
View of Lord Dennings:
The punishment to criminal adequately reflect the revulsion, hatred and condensation must be felt by a majority of citizens.
(VIII)Ultilitarian Theory:
This theory does not highlight or support any particular theory, but is one of the biggest theories for basis of punitive measure. They believe that punishment is an instrument for reducing crimes to matter from what approach they are adopted. There is no restriction to which theory by applied, the purpose is to achieve good consequences.
6. Conclusion:
To conclude, I can say, that a perfect system of criminal justice cannot be based on any one theory of punishment. Every has its own merits and every effort must be made to take the good points of all. The deterrent aspect of punishment must not be ignored, likewise the reformative aspect must be given its due place.