June 12, 2025 | New Delhi

 

In a ruling that sharpens the scope of India’s criminal laws on extortion, the Supreme Court has held that actual delivery of money or property is not required to establish an offence under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The ruling clarifies that the moment a person is intentionally placed in fear of death or grievous hurt in order to extort, the offence is deemed complete  even if the threat does not lead to any material gain.

 

A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Manoj Misra delivered the judgment on June 5, 2025, reinstating criminal proceedings that had earlier been quashed by the Allahabad High Court on the ground that no property had actually been obtained.

 

 

The Court emphasized that Section 387 is not contingent upon actual extortion, unlike Section 383 IPC. It specifically targets situations where fear is weaponized where a person is coerced or threatened with grievous harm to influence their actions.  The mere act of instilling fear with intent to extort falls squarely within the ambit of the provision.

 

“A threat that causes fear of serious harm is by itself a punishable offence under Section 387, irrespective of whether the person yields or not,” the Court observed.

 

This interpretation was made in light of a case involving a business owner who was allegedly threatened at gunpoint and asked to pay protection money. Despite no payment being made, the accused was charged under Section 387. The High Court quashed the summons, but the Supreme Court reversed that decision, stating the trial must go forward.

 

• Reinforces legal protection against coercive threats and blackmail, even in attempted extortion cases.

• Clarifies the distinction between completed and attempted extortion, helping police and courts handle such cases without misinterpreting the requirement for actual transfer of property.

• Sends a message that the use of threats alone, as a tactic for unlawful gain, will not go unpunished.

 

This decision is likely to influence ongoing and future cases where victims resist unlawful demands but are subjected to serious intimidation.