KIDNAPPING &

ABDUCTION
Dr. Sakshi Tewari,
Symbiosis Law School, Noida

AM V
• Kidnapping, common law
offence - term for the
practice of stealing
children for use as
labourers (16th Century)

• Derivation - kid (child) and

• Taking by force or fraud

• Repression/ composite
wrongdoing.

• It can likewise be
characterized as false
detainment by methods for
snatching, both of which
are separate wrongdoings
Sections 359 to 369 of the IPC have made kidnapping and abduction
punishable with varying degree of severity according to nature and
gravity of the offence.
 • Kidnapping is of two kinds u/S. 359, they
are:
•  Kidnapping from India
•  Kidnapping from lawful guardianship
• In Badlu Shah v Emperor 1923 (81) Ind
Cas 40 it was held that Kidnapping or
abduction are completely different from
Kidnapping the offence of wrongful confinement or
keeping in confinement (section 340).
• In wrongful confinement there is a mere
deprivation of a person's liberty so they
cannot move from one point to another. 
• Where as in Kidnapping or Abduction
there involves the taking control of a
person and carrying them away from
one point to another
 • Whoever conveys any person beyond the limits of India
without the consent of that person, or of some person
legally authorized to consent on behalf of that person,
is said to kidnap that person from India.
• Essential Ingredients :
•  Conveyance of a person: To convey means to carry
Section 360 - from one place to another. The conveyance or carrying
is a continuous process until the destination is reached.
Kidnapping In the case of any offence under this section, the
destination must be some foreign territory.
from India •  Beyond the limits of India: these words in the section
indicate that for an offence under it must be to some
foreign territory.
•  Without the consent of that person or of some
person legally authorized to consent on behalf of that
person: A consent given under a misapprehension of
fact, is not true consent.
• Whoever takes or entices any minor
 under sixteen years of age if a male, or under eighteen years of age if a female,
 or any person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such minor or person of
unsound mind,
 without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap such minor or person from lawful guardianship.
• The offence under this section may be committed in respect of either a minor or a person of unsound
mind.
• Lawful guardian definition – see explanation of 361(any person lawfully entrusted with the care or
custody of such minor or other person)
• Exception -  act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be the father of an ille­gitimate child,
or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled to lawful custody of such child unless such act is
committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose (Parental kidnapping ?)

ENTICI
Section 361 Kidnapping from
NG & lawful guardianship
TAKING
DIFFER
S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras 1965 SCR (1) 243
• Facts admitted:
 On 1st October 1960 Savitri left the house of K. Natarajan and telephoned Varadarajan to
meet her at a particular place.
 Varadarajan did not suggest Savitri leave the house of K. Natarajan and nor did Savitri left the
house at the instance.
 Savitri had stated that she wanted to marry the appellant. Varadarajan had not forced Savitri
to go to Registrar’s office and to marry him. 
 The insistence of marriage came from Savitri and not from Varadarajan. The fact that Savitri
accompanying the appellant all along is consistent with Savitri’s own desire to be the wife of
the appellant in which the desire of accompanying him wherever he went was implicit.
• Judgment: The Court observed that the appellant was not guilty of taking away Savitri out of
the keeping of her father. Savitri voluntarily accompanied Varadarajan and, the law does not
cast a duty on Varadarajan of taking Savitri back to her father’s house or even of telling her
not to accompany him.
• Ratio - Desire of the girl/victim is required to be seen. Ingredients of Section 361 are required
to be considered accordingly and not in technical interpretation. Ingredients of Section 361
I.P.C. cannot be said to be satisfied in a case where the minor having attained age of
discretion, left her guardian's protection knowingly (having capacity to know the full import
of what she was doing) and voluntarily joins the accused person. In such a case, it cannot be
said that the victim had been taken away from the keeping of her lawful guardian. So as to
show an act of criminality on the part of the accused, some kind of inducement held out by
the accused person or an active participation by him in the formation of the intention of the
minor to leave the house of the guardian, is required to be shown.
 • Taking or Enticing: -  the word ‘takes’ means to
cause to go, to escort or to get into the
possession; it does not imply force, actual or
construction. The word ‘entice’ involves an idea
of inducement by exciting hope or desire in the
order.
• One does not entice another unless the latter
attempted to do a thing which he or she would
Current not otherwise do. This is the key difference
between taking and enticing.
Jurispruden • Conclusion might be different in case evidence is
ce under S. collected by the investigating agency. However,
to establish that though immediately prior to the
361 minor leaving the guardian's protection, no
active part was played by the accused, he had at
some earlier stage solicited or persuaded the
minor to do so.
• Age verification – Sometimes ossification test is
done. http://ijtr.nic.in/CUSTODY_OF_MINOR.pdf
See in this pdf – the point no 8.26. “Parents
evidence & Ossification test report & school
records”
 Abduction
• Section 362 defines Abduction as:
• “Whoever by force compels, or by any deceitful
means induces, any person to go from any place, is
said to
It is not mandatory that physical force has to be
actually used, even the threat of using force is enough.
• Illustration: If Mr. X puts a gun on Ms. A’s head and
asks her to accompany him to his house. Further, Mr
X threatens Ms A that if she didn’t go with him, he
will shoot her. She goes to her house because of the
threat. This is a simple case of Abduction.
Note : this offence is different from the offence of
Extortion. Extortion is the wrongful use of actual or
threatened force, violence, or intimidation to gain
money or property from an individual or
entity. Extortion generally involves a threat being made
to the victim's person or property, or to their family or
friends
•