Breaking News, Latest News, World News, India News, Cricket, Videos & Photos

Is changing the price tag of the commodity amounts to theft?

Everyone desires to have all kinds of luxury and fancy products in your house unless you are not a monk. Who doesn’t want to buy everything they want and like at the mall?

People as per the budget buy goods or neither increase their budget to buy products. But changing the price tag of products just to get a cheaper price is against the person who is selling the goods and not morally good either!

So, we will know whether changing the price tag of the commodity amounts to theft?

 

English law

 

Section 1 (2) of the Theft Act, 1968 

It states that if a person appropriates property of another with dishonest intention to permanently deprive the owner from its property.

Punishment

Section 7 of the Theft Act, 1968 punishes the person who committed theft with imprisonment for 10 years.

 

Indian law

 

Section 378 of Indian Penal Code

Section 378 of Indian Penal Code talks about theft. It states that if any person dishonestly takes away movable property without the consent taken out of the possession of the person claiming it.

 

Essential Requisite

 

The ingredients of aforementioned section is –

  • Dishonest intention of the accused
  • There should be moveable property
  • Accused takes out the property out of the possession of the person
  • Wrongful gain to the accused and wrongful loss to another
  • Property taken without the consent of the person in possession.

 

Punishment

 

Section 379 of Indian Penal Code states that if a person commits theft then he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or fine or both.

 

Changing the price tag

Anderton v. Wish, (1980) CLR 319 DC (UK)

Fact – The accused changed the price tag of the product which she wants to buy. She took the price tag of a cheaper brush and stuck it on the costlier brush so that she would pay less than the amount required. But she was caught by the guard outside the shop.

Held – Under English law, she was held guilty of theft under Theft Act, 1968.

Comments are closed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept

Privacy & Cookies Policy