Aman takes property belonging to Rita out of Rita rsquo s possession in good faith believing when he...........

Legal Reasoning Others

Section 378 and 380 of the IPC defines theft. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.

Explanation 1.—A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being movable property, is not the subject of theft; but it becomes capable of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.

Explanation 2.—A moving effected by the same act which affects the severance may be a theft.

Explanation 3.—A person is said to cause a thing to move by removing an obstacle which prevented it from moving or by separating it from any other thing, as well as by actually moving it.

Explanation 4.—A person, who by any means causes an animal to move, is said to move that animal, and to move everything which, in consequence of the motion so caused, is moved by that animal.

Explanation 5.—The consent mentioned in the definition may be express or implied, and may be given either by the person in possession, or by any person having for that purpose authority either express or implied.

Aman takes property belonging to Rita out of Rita’s possession, in good faith, believing when he takes it, that the property belongs to him. Subsequently, Aman, on discovering his mistake, without disclosing the actual facts, dishonestly sells the property to a stranger.

Aman is not guilty because when he took the property, he believed in good faith that it belonged to him.

Aman is guilty of an offence of misappropriation.

Aman may be guilty of theft but not for misappropriation.

Aman is not guilty as the property can be recovered from the stranger

Explanation:

One who dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use or sells any moveable property belonging to another, is guilty of the offence of misappropriation.