The essential ingredients of the offence of criminal intimidation under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code are threatening a person with an injury, with the intent to cause alarm or to compel the person to do or omit an act, and the prosecution must prove these ingredients beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

Ray, J. - These three Petitioners were convicted by the Magistrate u/s 506, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo R.I for one month each. On appeal to the Sessions Judge, the conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to a fine of Rs. 50/- each, in default to undergo R.I. for one month.

2. The complainant's son is the owner of survey No. 479/4 of village Arjunapalli. Adjoining it is another plot which is survey No. 27 and belongs to the accused. The accused purchased this plot from the undivided brother of the complainant. The complainant (p.w. 1) had a suspicion that the Petitioners had amalgamated a portion of the plot with their own adjoining plot. Accordingly he applied to the Tahasildar for an Amin for measuring the plot and demarcating the boundary. The Amin (p.w. 5) went to the disputed site on 12-4-1965 and demarcated the boundary in the presence of both parties and some boundary pillars were erected. Then the parties dispersed. Later that day at about 3 P.M. the complainant (p.w. 1), the Amin (p.w. 5) and the Amin's peon were proceeding to another village. On the way near about the disputed land, they found the Petitioners sitting on the ridge of the disputed land. On seeing them, they started uprooting the boundary stones fixed by the Amin on the morning of that day. p.w. 1 protested. Petitioner. 1 was armed with a Kati and Petitioners 2 and 3 were armed with lathis. They rushed at the complainant, rebuked him and threatened him with assault. The Amin, his peon and other Bhadralokas, viz., p.ws. 2, 3 and 4 intervened and the matter subsided. The Petitioners thereafter left the place. The complainant thereupon reported the incident to the police and ultimately filed this complaint in Court.

3. The Petitioners were summoned under Sections 447 and 506, Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate acquitted them of the charge u/s 447, but convicted them u/s 506 as aforesaid. On appeal, the conviction was maintained by the sessions judge, but the sentence was reduced. This revision has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and sentence of the Sessions Judge.

4. The points urged on be half of the Petitioners are as follows:

(i) In absence of a finding of intent which is one of the essential ingredients of the offence of criminal intimidation, the conviction is bad in law. The ingredients of Section 503 have not been made out; and

(ii) The evidence of p.ws. 1 and 5 does not disclose that there was any threat of any injury to the complainant, and that the nature of threat was such that any alarm was caused to him there by.

5. Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code is the penal section which provides for punishment for the offence of criminal intimidation. Section 503 defines the offence. On an analysis of that section it is to be seen that the essential ingredients of the offence are:

(a) Threatening a person with an injury.

(b) The threat must be with the intent to cause alarm to that person or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat.

The charge for this offence runs as follows:

That you on or about the same day (12th April, 1965) same time at the same place you all threatened Joginath Sahu with intent to cause alarm in the mind of the said Joginath.

The charge of course ill silent as to the manner of threat, but if the complainant and other witnesses have spoken to such manner, then the slight omission in the charge would not vitiate either the charge or the proceedings. The complainant on this point states as follows:

1 found the accused persons uprooting the boundary stones pitched by the surveyor on that day. When I along with Radha Charan objected the highhanded Action of the accused persons, the accused persons told the surveyor to leave me so that they will assault me. Accused Bhikari was armed with a Kati, Kashi and Nakul were armed with lathis. D