Theft, Extortion, Robbery, Dacoity

📑 On this page

⚡ The short answer

Theft is dishonestly moving someone's movable property out of their possession without consent. Extortion is getting them to hand property over by putting them in fear of injury. Either becomes robbery when the offender uses or threatens instant death, hurt or restraint. Robbery by five or more people acting together is dacoity.

🎬 The 30-second story

The bus-stop phone

“Bus in 4 minutes. One more reel…”

🚏

Zoya

Zoya scrolls on her new phone.

“Thanks for the upgrade!”

🛵

Aarav

Version 1: Aarav rides past and plucks it from her hand.

“Let go or I break your wrist!”

✋

Aarav

Version 2: Zoya holds on. Aarav twists her wrist till she drops it.

“Same phone. Same crime?”

🚓

Zoya

Zoya complains about both.

Tara's ruling: Version 1 is theft: a dishonest taking without consent, with no hurt. Version 2 is robbery: Aarav caused hurt in order to get the phone. With four friends helping him, it would be dacoity.

What is theft, exactly?

Theft is the base rung. It has five parts and all five must be present; miss one and there is no theft, though there may be another offence.

🧮 The formula

The five parts of theft

🧠

Dishonest intention

wrongful gain or loss

📦

Movable property

not land, not people

🏠

In someone's possession

not just ownership

🚫

No consent

express or implied

↗️

Moved

even an inch

🕵️

Theft

Dishonest has a narrow meaning: intending wrongful gain to someone or wrongful loss to someone, of property they aren't entitled to keep, or are entitled to have. A passage may compress all this into one line, like ‘whoever takes away any moveable thing without consent commits theft’. Read each word as a condition, and don't add words the passage left out.

📌 What CLAT actually expects

The passage gives you the definitions. Tick each ingredient against the facts, spot the one that's missing, and climb the ladder only as far as the facts allow.

How do theft, extortion, robbery and dacoity fit together?

🎚️ The scale

The property ladder

← Quiet takingViolent gang →

Theft

Taken without consent.

e.g. a wallet lifted from a bag

Extortion

Victim hands it over out of fear.

e.g. ‘pay or I leak your photos’

Robbery

Either of these plus instant violence or threat.

e.g. knife out, ‘wallet, now’

Dacoity

Robbery by five or more.

e.g. a gang raids a dhaba

Each rung adds one element: fear, then immediacy, then numbers.

⚔️ Side by side

Theft vs extortion

🕵️Theft

The offender takes

•No consent at all
•No fear needed
•Movable property only

😨Extortion

The victim delivers

•‘Consent’ given out of fear
•Fear of injury is the engine
•Also signed papers that can become a security

Test	Theft	Extortion
Who moves the property?	The offender	The victim
Distance	Offender must be there	Works by phone or message
Complete when	It is moved	It is delivered

Theft goes around the owner's will; extortion bends it through fear.

🧭 Decision flow

Which property offence is it?

❓ Did the victim hand over property because the offender made them fear some injury?

Yes →

❓ Was the offender present, threatening instant harm, with the property handed over then and there?

No →

Extortion

Yes ↓

❓ Were five or more committing it or present and helping?

Yes →

Dacoity

No →

Robbery

No →

❓ Was movable property dishonestly moved out of someone's possession without consent?

No →

Not theft

Try misappropriation, breach of trust or cheating.

Yes ↓

❓ Did the offender cause or attempt death, hurt or restraint (or fear of it, instantly) to take or carry off the loot?

No →

Theft

Yes ↓

When is taking something not theft?

Dishonesty: even a day's deprivation counts

You needn't mean to keep it forever. Keeping an owner out of their property for a while is wrongful loss, so ‘I'd have returned it’ is no defence. But an honest claim of right, however mistaken, is: if Rohan genuinely thinks the goat in Kabir's yard is his and leads it home, there's no theft. A claim invented as cover doesn't count.

Situation	Theft?	Why
Meher borrows a friend's novel, sure he wouldn't mind	No	She believes she has implied consent
Zoya takes back her pawned watch from Kabir without repaying	Yes	Kabir lawfully holds it; she causes him wrongful loss, though she owns it
Rohan picks up a ring lying on a public road	No	Nobody possesses it; keeping it dishonestly is misappropriation
Rohan pockets a ring from a table in Kabir's house	Yes	Things in your house are in your possession
Aarav keeps a lost dog until its owner pays a reward	Yes	Holding property to extract a reward is dishonest

→ scroll to see more

Movable, possessed, and moved

✓Things attached to the earth aren't movable. Cut Kabir's mango tree to take it and the theft is complete at the moment of cutting.
✓People are not property. Taking a child away is a kidnapping question, not theft.
✓Possession, not ownership. A servant who runs off with the master's silver commits theft; a warehouse keeper who sells goods left with him had possession, so it's criminal breach of trust.
✓Moving completes it. A few centimetres is enough. Baiting Kabir's dog to follow you is theft once it starts following; intending without moving is at most an attempt.

What turns a threat into extortion?

The offender intentionally puts someone in fear of injury to them or anyone else, and that fear dishonestly induces them to deliver property. Injury is any harm illegally caused to body, mind, reputation or property: threats to leak photos, smash a shop or hurt a child all qualify.

Delivery is essential. No handing over, no extortion; the bare threat is a lesser offence.
Distance is no defence. A WhatsApp threat from another city works.
Paper counts. Forcing someone to sign a blank page or promissory note is extortion.
The threatened harm must be illegal. Threatening to sue for money genuinely owed is generally not ‘injury’.

When do theft and extortion become robbery?

Robbery is always theft or extortion made worse. Theft becomes robbery when the offender voluntarily causes or attempts death, hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of them instantly, for that end: to commit the theft, while committing it, or to carry away the loot.

🕒 Timeline

Does the violence make it robbery?

1
Before

To make the theft possible

Tying up the watchman to open the safe. Robbery.
2
During

While taking it

Shoving Zoya aside to grab her bag. Robbery.
3
Getaway

Carrying off the loot

Punching the guard while holding the cash. Robbery.
4
After

Loot dropped, just escaping

Stoning pursuers after abandoning the bag. Theft plus hurt.

⚠️ ‘There was violence’ is not enough

The hurt must be voluntary and for the theft. A thief who accidentally nicks the owner's wrist while cutting a bag strap commits theft, not robbery.

Extortion becomes robbery when the offender is present (near enough to act at once), the fear is of instant death, hurt or restraint to the victim or another, and the property is handed over then and there. ‘Your purse or I drop your child off this ledge’, said on the spot, is robbery. ‘My gang has your child; send money tonight’ is extortion.

How many people make a dacoity?

Dacoity is robbery plus a headcount. A gang terrifies more than a lone robber, so every member is punished far more heavily.

🧩 At a glance

Rules of the headcount

🖐️Five or more

Four armed robbers commit robbery. The fifth makes it dacoity.

👀Helpers count

A lookout or getaway driver present and aiding is added.

🎯Attempt is enough

Five who try and flee empty-handed have committed dacoity.

🤝Conjointly

They must act in concert, not as five separate robbers.

⚖️One kills, all answer

A murder by one member exposes all to the graver punishment.

Victims who don't resist because they're outnumbered don't turn a dacoity back into theft. And the court needs proof that five took part, not five convictions.

Which cases should you know?

✈️

Landmark case · 1957 · Supreme Court

KN Mehra v State of Rajasthan

📋

What happened

Two Air Force cadets, one just discharged, took off before dawn in a training aircraft without authorisation and force-landed in Pakistan.

❓

The question

Is it theft if a trainee allowed to fly takes a plane he might give back?

🔨

What the court held

Yes. The flight was unauthorised, so there was no consent, and using the plane for his own ends kept the government out of it. Temporary deprivation is enough.

What CLAT takes from it: Theft needs no intention to keep the thing for ever.

📁

Landmark case · 1962 · Supreme Court

Pyare Lal Bhargava v State of Rajasthan

📋

What happened

A government superintendent took an official file home and let a friend swap documents in it. The file was back in the office next day.

❓

The question

Is a file returned within a day stolen?

🔨

What the court held

Yes. Wrongful loss need not be permanent; temporary dispossession, even with intent to return, can be theft.

What CLAT takes from it: ‘I gave it back’ never undoes a dishonest moving.

💵

Landmark case · 2007 · Supreme Court

Dhananjay v State of Bihar

📋

What happened

In a debt dispute, men slapped a trader and took ₹1,580 from his shirt pocket. He alleged extortion.

❓

The question

Was this extortion?

🔨

What the court held

No. He delivered nothing and wasn't induced by fear to pay. Extortion overpowers the owner's will; theft takes without consent.

What CLAT takes from it: Ask who moved the property: the victim or the offender.

How has CLAT asked this?

CLAT 2019 tested theft directly; with no official key, the answer is our solution. The second question is CLAT-style practice written by us, not from a past paper.

📝 Asked in CLAT 2019 · Q73 Theft needs a movable thing

Principle: Whoever takes away any moveable thing from the land of any person without that person's consent is said to commit theft. Facts: During his visit to the home of C, A asks B, the son of C, to accompany A to a forest. Neither A nor B inform C in this regard. B accompanies A to the forest.

The paper gives no separate question: choose the option that applies the principle.

AA has committed theft.

BA has not committed theft.

CA has committed theft as soon as he entered the home of C.

DA has not committed theft till B did not accompany him.

Reveal answer + reasoning

Answer: B

Taken from C's home? Yes. Without C's consent? Yes. A moveable thing? No: B is a person, not property. One ingredient fails, so no theft. (Taking a child from a guardian is kidnapping, which the passage doesn't ask about.) Our solution: B.

Why the others fail

A — It treats a human being as a ‘moveable thing’.
C — Entering a house takes nothing away.
D — B going along doesn't make him property.

🧪 CLAT-style practice (not a past question) CLAT-style: extortion vs robbery

Principle: Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury, and thereby dishonestly induces that person to deliver any property, commits extortion. Extortion is robbery if the offender is in the presence of the person put in fear, puts that person in fear of instant death, hurt or wrongful restraint to that person or another, and so induces delivery then and there. Facts: X calls Y from another city: ‘I have your son. Transfer ₹2 lakh within the hour or he gets hurt.’ The son is safe at college. Terrified, Y transfers the money.

Which offence has X committed?

ARobbery, because Y feared hurt to his son.

BExtortion, but not robbery.

CTheft, because X dishonestly obtained the money.

DNo offence, because the son was never in danger.

Reveal answer + reasoning

Answer: B

Fear of injury to another person counts, and it made Y deliver: extortion. A bluff still creates fear. Robbery also needs X to be present and threaten instant harm; a call from another city is neither. Answer: B.

Why the others fail

A — Fear alone is extortion; robbery needs presence and immediacy.
C — Y handed the money over; nothing was taken without consent.
D — A bluff that works still induces delivery by fear.

Can you dodge these property-crime traps?

💥 Myth vs fact

Flip before the exam does

🙅 Myth

You can't steal your own property.

Tap to bust it →

✅ Fact

Take back a pawned watch without repaying and it's theft.

🙅 Myth

No theft if you meant to return it.

Tap to bust it →

✅ Fact

Temporary deprivation is wrongful loss: the cadet's plane, the superintendent's file.

🙅 Myth

Any theft with violence is robbery.

Tap to bust it →

✅ Fact

The violence must be voluntary and for the theft, not accidental or just to escape.

🙅 Myth

Dacoity needs five people grabbing property.

Tap to bust it →

✅ Fact

Helpers present and aiding count, and a failed attempt by five is enough.

🎯 Quick quiz

Five takings, one ladder

0 / 5

Aarav, who hasn't spoken to his neighbour Rohan in months, rides Rohan's bike round the city without asking and parks it back two hours later.

Q1. Has Aarav committed theft?

Aarav emails Kabir: ‘Pay ₹10,000 or I post fifty fake one-star reviews of your shop.’ Kabir pays by UPI.

Q2. Aarav's offence?

Rohan grabs cash from Kabir's till. The guard catches his arm at the door; Rohan drops the cash, punches the guard and runs off empty-handed.

Q3. Rohan's offence?

Four men with knives take gold from a jeweller's shop. A fifth, as planned, stands at the door watching for police.

Q4. Their offence?

Zoya pawns her gold chain with Kabir for a loan, then takes it from his locker without repaying.

Q5. Has Zoya committed theft?

🎯 In a nutshell

Theft: dishonesty, movable property, someone's possession, no consent, moving.
Temporary deprivation is enough; an honest claim of right is a defence.
Extortion: fear of injury makes the victim deliver.
Robbery: theft or extortion plus instant violence or threat, used for the taking.
Dacoity: robbery by five or more, counting those present and aiding.

📎 Good to know, not to memorise

Theft: IPC 378 is now BNS 303, which allows community service for a first theft under ₹5,000 once the property is returned.
BNS 304 adds snatching: theft by a sudden or forcible grab.
Extortion, robbery, dacoity: IPC 383, 390, 391 are now BNS 308, 309, 310.
‘Dishonestly’ and ‘movable property’: BNS 2(7) and 2(21).

Climb the ladder at exam speed

Timed criminal law questions, every answer explained.

Practise Criminal Law drills

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between theft and extortion?

In theft, the offender takes property without the owner's consent. In extortion, the owner hands it over, but only because the offender intentionally put them in fear of injury to themselves or someone else. Theft covers only movable property; extortion also covers signed papers that can be turned into a security.

What is the difference between robbery and dacoity?

Only the number of people. Robbery is theft or extortion made worse by instant violence or the threat of it. When five or more people commit or attempt that robbery together, counting those present and helping, every one of them commits dacoity, which is punished far more severely.

Is it theft if I meant to return the thing?

Usually yes. Dishonesty means intending wrongful gain or loss, and keeping an owner out of their property even for a few hours is a wrongful loss. The Supreme Court convicted a cadet who flew off in an Air Force plane, and an officer who returned a file the next day.

Is snatching a phone theft or robbery?

A quick grab with no hurt, restraint or threat is theft; the new criminal code calls it snatching. If the snatcher twists your arm, pushes you down or threatens to stab you to get the phone or get away with it, the theft becomes robbery.

Do I need to remember section numbers for CLAT?

No. CLAT gives you the definitions in the passage. What you need is the habit of checking each ingredient against the facts: who moved the property, whether there was fear, whether the harm threatened was instant, and how many people took part.