Balaji Traders vs State Of U.P 2025 INSC 806 - S.387 IPC - Extortion
Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 387 [Section 308(4) IPC] Nowhere does the Section say that extortion has to be committed while putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. Instead, it is the other way around, that is to say, putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt to commit extortion. Extortion is not yet committed; it is in the process of committing it that a person is put in fear. Putting a person in fear would make an accused guilty of an offence under Section 387 IPC; it need not satisfy all the ingredients of extortion provided under Section 383 IPC. (Para 25) for prosecution under Section 387 IPC, the delivery of property is not necessary. (Para 14)
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 482 [Section 528 BNSS] - principles of quashing criminal cases/complaints/FIR - Referred to B.N. John v. State of U.P , Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2021) 19 SCC 401 and Dalip Kaur v. Jagnar Singh (2009) 14 SCC 696. (Para 17-18)
Interpretation of Statutes - Penal statutes must be given strict interpretation- The scope of the provision cannot be extended by reading into it words which are not there- The Court ought not to read anything into a statutory provision that imposes penal liability -A penal provision must be strictly construed; that is to say, in the absence of clear, compelling language, the provision should not be given a wider interpretation. M. Narayanan Nambiar v. State of Kerala 1962 SCC OnLine SC 85 and Tolaram Relumal v. State of Bombay (1954) 1 SCC 961, R. Kalyani v. Janak C. Mehta (2009) 1 SCC 516 and Dilip Kumar Sharma v. State of M.P. 1968 SCC OnLine SC 310. (Para 19-24)
To attract Section 387 IPC, should extortion be committed while putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt?#SupremeCourt answers: https://t.co/eyL9ro5742 pic.twitter.com/NKXaO7zSdn
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) June 6, 2025