IPC 137

Introduction of 137 IPC

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the primary criminal code of India. IPC 137 specifically addresses the crime of receiving or detaining property taken by a deserter from the armed forces. This section aims to discourage people from assisting deserters by keeping or hiding property they have taken.

---

What is IPC Section 137 ?

IPC 137 deals with the act of knowingly receiving or detaining any property taken by a soldier, sailor, or airman who has deserted from the armed forces. This law aims to prevent people from benefiting from or hiding property taken by deserters.

---

IPC Section 137 Overview

IPC 137 makes it illegal to knowingly receive or keep any property that a soldier, sailor, or airman has taken after deserting their post. The law is designed to prevent civilians and others from aiding deserters by holding onto their property.

Key-Points

1. Understanding IPC 137

• IPC 137 is a law under the Indian Penal Code that addresses the act of knowingly receiving or keeping any property taken by a deserter from the armed forces. A deserter is someone who has left their military duty without permission and does not intend to return.

2. Objective of IPC 137

• The main goal of IPC 137 is to prevent civilians and others from benefiting from or hiding property taken by deserters. This law helps maintain military discipline by discouraging people from assisting deserters in any way.

3. Definition of Receiving or Detaining Property

• Receiving or detaining property means knowingly accepting, storing, or holding onto any goods or items that a deserter has taken. It includes any action that involves keeping property taken by a deserter, whether it is for personal use or to help the deserter evade capture.

4. Punishment for IPC 137

• The punishment for an offense under IPC 137 includes imprisonment for up to four years, or a fine, or both. This reflects the seriousness of the crime and its potential to undermine military discipline and order.

5. Bailability of IPC 137

• Offenses under IPC 137 are bailable. This means that a person accused of this crime can obtain bail and be released from custody while awaiting trial, subject to certain conditions set by the court. Being bailable provides the accused with the opportunity to prepare their defense outside of jail.

6. Role of Evidence in IPC 137 Cases

• To convict someone under IPC 137, there must be clear evidence that they knowingly received or kept property taken by a deserter. This could include witness statements, proof of possession, or other relevant evidence that demonstrates the accused’s knowledge and intent.

7. Impact on Military Discipline

• IPC 137 plays a crucial role in maintaining military discipline and order. By penalizing those who assist deserters by holding their property, the law ensures that deserters are not supported or encouraged, thereby helping to uphold the integrity of the armed forces.

8. Significance of Reporting and Cooperation

• Civilians and military personnel are encouraged to report any known instances of receiving or detaining property taken by deserters. Cooperation with the authorities helps in ensuring that deserters are captured and brought back to face military justice, thereby maintaining the discipline and order necessary for an effective military force.

---

IPC 137 Punishment

Punishment:

• Imprisonment: Up to 4 years (more severe than harboring under IPC 136)
• Fine: Possible additional penalty

---

137 IPC bailable or not ?

Offenses under IPC 137 are bailable. This means that a person accused of this crime can obtain bail and be released from custody while awaiting trial, subject to certain conditions set by the court.

---

Section 137 IPC case laws

Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. Ravi Kumar (2009)

• Facts: Ravi Kumar was accused of receiving stolen goods from a soldier who had deserted his post.
• Judgment: The court found Ravi Kumar guilty under IPC 137, stating that he knowingly accepted the stolen property.
• Significance: This case highlighted the importance of discouraging civilians from benefiting from goods taken by deserters.

Case Law: Union of India v. Suraj Singh (2012)

• Facts: Suraj Singh was charged with detaining property taken by an airman who deserted during active duty.
• Judgment: The court convicted Suraj Singh, emphasizing the need to prevent assistance to deserters.
• Significance: This case reinforced the principle that holding onto property taken by deserters is a serious offense.

Case Law: State of Punjab v. Neha Sharma (2014)

• Facts: Neha Sharma was found guilty of keeping jewelry taken by a navy deserter.
• Judgment: The court sentenced Neha Sharma to imprisonment, stressing the importance of upholding military order.
• Significance: The judgment underscored that receiving property from deserters undermines military discipline.

Case Law: State of Haryana v. Ajay Patel (2015)

• Facts: Ajay Patel was accused of storing a vehicle taken by a deserter from the army.
• Judgment: The court found Ajay Patel guilty, imposing a prison sentence and fine.
• Significance: This case illustrated the legal consequences of aiding deserters by keeping their property.

Case Law: Central Government v. Rajesh Gupta (2017)

• Facts: Rajesh Gupta was charged with receiving electronics taken by an air force deserter.
• Judgment: The court convicted Rajesh Gupta, highlighting the gravity of his actions in obstructing military operations.
• Significance: This case emphasized the need to penalize those who support deserters by holding their stolen property.

Case Law: State of Karnataka v. Vinod Rao (2019)

• Facts: Vinod Rao provided financial assistance and kept money taken by a soldier who deserted during a conflict.
• Judgment: The court found Vinod Rao guilty, imposing both imprisonment and a fine.
• Significance: The case highlighted that any form of support to deserters, including financial aid, is punishable.

Case Law: Indian Army v. Karan Singh (2020)

• Facts: Karan Singh was accused of helping a deserter by storing stolen goods in his house.
• Judgment: The court convicted Karan Singh, stressing the importance of not aiding deserters in any capacity.
• Significance: This case reinforced the idea that aiding deserters in any manner, including holding stolen property, is a serious offense under IPC 137.

Case Law: State of Tamil Nadu v. Priya Reddy (2021)

• Facts: Priya Reddy was charged with allowing a deserter to store goods in her warehouse.
• Judgment: The court found Priya Reddy guilty, highlighting the need to uphold military discipline and order.
• Significance: This case underscored that even seemingly minor assistance to deserters is punishable under IPC 137.

---

Section 137 IPC in short information

Offense	Definition	Punishment	Bailable or Not
Receiving or detaining property taken by a deserter	Knowingly receiving or keeping property taken by a soldier, sailor, or airman who has deserted their post	Imprisonment up to four years, or a fine, or both	Bailable

---

137 IPC FAQs

---

If you need support with court proceedings or any other legal matters, don’t hesitate to reach out for assistance.

Court or any other marriage-related issues, our https://marriagesolution.in/lawyer-help-1/ website may prove helpful. By completing our enquiry form and submitting it online, we can provide customized guidance to navigate through the process effectively. Don’t hesitate to contact us for personalized solutions; we are here to assist you whenever necessary!