Case – Jadunandan Singh v. Emperor, 1941
Case Summary
| Citation | Jadunandan Singh v. Emperor, 1941 |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | Narain Dusadh and Sheonandan Singh, were returning after the inspection of some fields when the two petitioners and others assaulted them. The petitioner gave a blow to Narain on the right leg, and then other people assaulted Sheonandan. Jadunandan, after this, forcibly took the thumb impression of Narain on one piece of blank paper, and of Sheonandan on three blank papers. According to these findings, the two petitioners and two others were convicted for extortion under section 384 of IPC by the lower court. |
| Issues | Whether Jadunandan had committed offence of extortion? Whether Jadunandan had committed the offence of theft? |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | It is clear from the definition of extortion that the prosecution to prove that the victims Narain and Sheonandan were put in fear of injury to themselves or to others, and further, were thereby dishonestly induced to deliver paper containing their thumb impressions. The prosecution story in the present case goes no further than that thumb impressions were ‘forcibly taken’ from them. The lower courts only speak of the forcibly taking of the thumb impressions of the victim; and this does not necessarily involve inducing the victim to deliver papers with his thumb impressions (papers which could no doubt be converted into valuable securities). In this case taking was involved. But this taking of documents was not out of possession of victim. So it was not theft. The offence of extortion is not established. On the findings, the offence is no more than the use of criminal force of an assault punishable under section 352, IPC. |
| Judgement | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
To do
