Case – Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, 1963
हिन्दी मे पढ़ने के लिए इस लिंक पर क्लिक करिये प्यारे लाल भार्गव बनाम राजस्थान राज्य 1963
Case Summary
| Citation | Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, 1963 |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | Ram Kumar Ram obtained permission from the Alwar Government to supply electricity. Ram Kumar Ram was a friend of Pyarelal Bhargava, who was a Superintendent in the Chief Engineers Office, Alwar. At the instance of Ram Kumar Ram, Pyarelal Bhargava got the file Ex. PA/ 1 from the Secretariat and took the file to his house and made it available to Ram Kumar Ram and some documents were substituted. It was again put in the ‘Office. |
| Issues | Whether temporary deprivation of document amount to theft? Whether unlawfully taking the file from the department amount to dishonestly? |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | Supreme Court observed that it is not necessary that the taking should be of a permanent character, or that the accused should have derived any profit. A temporary removal of file from the office of a Chief Engineer and making it available to a private person for a day or two amounts to the offence of theft. The file was in the Secretariat of the Department concerned, which was in charge of the Chief Engineer. The appellant was only one of the officers working in that department and it cannot, therefore, be said that he was in legal possession of the file. To commit theft one need not take movable property permanently out of the possession of another with the intention not to return it to him. It would satisfy the definition if he took any movable property out of the possession of another person though he intended to return it later on. Illustrations 378(b) and (l) support this reasoning. The appellant unauthorizedly took the file from the office and handed it over to Ram Kumar Ram. He had, therefore, unlawfully taken the file from the department, and for a short time he deprived the Engineering Department of the possession of the said file. The loss need not be caused by a permanent deprivation of property but may be caused even by temporary dispossession, though the person taking it intended to restore it sooner or later. A temporary period of deprivation or dispossession of the property of another causes loss to the other. Monetary loss is not necessary. Pyare Lal Bhargava was liable for theft. |
| Judgement | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
To do
