LI Network
Published on: December 27, 2023 at 06:39 IST
The Allahabad High Court has underscored that an aggrieved person is a crucial element for the application of extortion under Section 383/384 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
This observation was made by the Lucknow Bench of the Court in response to an application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) seeking the quashing of the charge sheet arising from an FIR under Section 384 IPC.
Justice Rajeev Singh, sitting as a Single Bench, noted, “As per the provisions of Section 383 IPC, it is necessary that there must be an aggrieved person in the case of extortion.”
The court further pointed out, “It is evident from the record that no alleged photograph is annexed with the case diary. Further, when there is no aggrieved person in the case of extortion, then merely on the basis of imagination, no such person can be implicated.
As the charge sheet was bet by the Prosecuting Officer and approved by the Circle Officer of the area in question in the most negligent manner without considering the ingredients of Section 383 IPC, therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned charge sheet dated 13.10.2020 and its consequential proceedings as well the summoning order dated 25.04.2022 along with the order dated 02.08.2023 are liable to be set aside and are hereby set aside.”
Case Background:
The applicant’s counsel argued that the applicant was falsely implicated in the case based on the presumption that he was extorting money from truck drivers. The FIR, lodged by a Sub Inspector, alleged that the applicant, a home guard deployed at a No Entry Point, was extorting money from truck drivers, as seen in a video received by the Sub Inspector during patrolling.
The High Court commented, “… the present case is the classic example of false implication, in which, the applicant has been victimized by implicating him falsely, and hence, he should be compensated with the cost of some token amount.”
Consequently, the High Court granted the application, setting aside the charge sheet and related proceedings, and awarded compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs to the applicant.
Case Title: Ram Gopal Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others