Kidnapping and Abduction

Kidnapping and
Abduction
Essentials of kidnapping from
lawful guardianship
Taking and Enticing
State of Haryana v. Raja Ram, AIR 1973 SC 819
• Facts
• ‘the prosecutrix was a young girl of 14 years. She became friendly with
a person called Jai Narain, aged 32, who was a frequent visitor. When
Jai Narain was forbidden by the prosecutrix’s father from coming
home, he sent messages through one Raja Ram. She was constantly
persuaded to leave the house and come with Jai Narain, who would
keep her in a lot of material comfort. One night, the prosecutrix
arranged to meet Jai Narain in his house and went to meet him where
she was seduced by Jai Narain. Jai Narain was convicted under s 376
for rape of minor and Raja Ram under s 366. The question before the
Supreme Court was whether Raja Ram could be said to have ‘taken’
the minor girl, since she willingly accompanied him.
SC Held
• The Supreme Court held that it was not necessary that the taking or enticing must
be shown to have been by means of force or fraud. Persuasion by the accused
person, which creates willingness on the part of the minor to be taken out of the
keeping of the lawful guardian, would be sufficient to attract the section.
Persuading or soliciting a minor to abandon legal guardianship at any stage by a
person is sufficient to hold him responsible under s 361, IPC. 6However, ‘taking
away’ is distinct from ‘allowing’ a minor to ‘accompany’. The former, unlike the
latter, implies certain active role on the part of the accused in making the minor to
leave or keep out of the legal guardian.
• The word ‘entice’ connotes the idea of inducement or pursuance by offer of
pleasure or some other form of allurement. This may work immediately or it may
create continuous and gradual but imperceptible impression culminating after
some time in achieving its ultimate purpose of successful inducement. Inducing a
minor girl by promise of marriage to leave the house of her guardian amounts to
enticement within the meaning of the section.
In S Varadarajan v State of
Madras ,
• A girl who was on the verge of attaining majority,
voluntarily left her father’s house, arranged to meet the
accused at a certain place and went to the sub-registrar’s
office, where the accused and the girl registered an
agreement o marry. There was no evidence whatsoever
that the accused had ‘taken’ her out of the lawful
guardianship of her parents, as there was no active part
played by the accused to persuade her to leave the house.
It was held that no offence under this section was made
out.
Minor Age
Smt. Suman & Anr. vs State Of U.P.
• Allahabad held that if a minor girl, who is 17 years old and

is mature enough to understand the consequences and
rationale behind her action, leaves the guardianship of her
parents to live with a boy who has in no way subjected her
to any kind of pressure, inducement etc, it cannot result in
an offence under section 361 of IPC and is not punishable.
Taking and Enticing
Biswanath Mallick v. State of Orissa (1995) Cr LJ 1416
Facts
Kalyani, had been kidnapped by the accused/petitioner Biswant
Mallick when she had gone out around midnight. He first took her to
Cuttack, then to Bhubaneshwar and finally to Jeypore. Her father
lodged a complaint at the police station. During the investigation, she
was found and rescued from the house of a relative of the accused.
The petitioner was held guilty and sentenced to two years rigorous
imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100. On the petition, the counsel for
the accused argued that the girl had attained the age of discretion
(age to take decisions for herself and understand the consequences
of her act) as she was 17 years, 8 months and 7 days old and thus
kidnapping did not take place.
Section 362 - Abduction
• Whoever by force compels, or by any deceitful means
induces, any person to go from any place, is said to abduct
that person.
• Section 362 merely defines the term ‘abduction’.
Therefore, abduction per se is not offence under the IPC.
It is an offence when it is accompanied by certain intent to
commit another offence. Force or fraud is essential to
make abduction punishable.
• Only if the abduction falls in the categories provided
under ss 364, 365, 366, 367 and 369, will it amount to an
offence.
• By Force - Where an accused threatened the prosecutrix
with a pistol to make her go with him, it would amount to
abduction under this section.
• In view of the definition, the word ‘force’ connotes actual

force and not merely show or threat of force. It would be
an offence to carry a grown-up woman by force against
her own will even with the object of restoring her to her
husband. [Allu vs Emperor, AIR 1925 Lah 512]
• The expression deceitful as used here, is wide enough to
include inducing a girl to leave her guardian’s house on a
pretext. It also implies the use of misrepresentation and
fraud by act or conduct. (R. vs Cort (2004) 4 All ER 137
(CA)]
• Deceitful Means - Under this section, inducing a person
by deceitful means to go from any place is also an offence.
Deceitful means is used as an alternative to ‘use of force’.
Thus, a person can use force to compel, or in the
alternative, deceive a person to leave a place. Either way,
it amounts to abduction. Deceitful means misleading a
person by making false representations and thereby
persuading the person to leave any place.
State of West Bengal v. Mir
• Facts
Mohammad Omar.
• The victim, Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal was doing small business in Calcutta.
The accused, Mir Mohammad Omar and Sajad Ali wanted him to pay them
INR 50,000 for allowing him to do his business without any hindrance or
obstructions. But Mahesh did not agree to their demands which led to a
fight. A few nights later, when Mahesh returned to his house, his sister told
him that a few assailants had come before looking for him, and were
threatening to hurt him. Scared, Mahesh left to take asylum at his friend’s
house for the night. Just an hour after he had been at his friend’s place, a
man came to tell Mahesh that Omar is waiting outside for him. Mahesh
went out and Omar asked him to accompany him, but Mahesh disagreed.
Thereafter, Omar forcibly took Mahesh to the Rickshaw, but Mahesh
escaped and went to a neighbour’s house where he took asylum. At around
2:30, the accused entered Mahesh’s room and dragged him out. He
resisted but was beaten by a lathi and taken away. His neighbour went and
lodged a police complaint that very night.

Kidnapping and Abduction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kidnapping and Abduction

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

Kidnapping and Abduction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kidnapping and

• Allahabad held that if a minor girl, who is 17 years old and

• In view of the definition, the word ‘force’ connotes actual

You might also like