Section 507. Criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication

From Advocatespedia, ASSN: 152239
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Under section 507 of Indian Penal Code,1860, anyone who commits the offence of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication or having taken precaution to conceal the name or abode of the person from whom the threat comes, shall be punished with imprisonment of either for a term which may extend to two years, in addition to the punishment provided for the offence by the last preceding section.[1] It is covered under CHAPTER XXII of INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860 which covers CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, INSULT AND ANNOYANCE. It is non-cognizable and bailable offence which is triable by Magistrate of First Class.


As provided under section 506 and imprisonment which may extend to two years.


Allahabad High Court

Joya Khan vs State of U.P and Anr. on 13 February, 2020

Charges have been framed under section 386, 507 of I.P.C.As per the F.I.R, it is alleged that the applicant under the influence of liquor had taken some objectionable pictures of first informant and threatened to make it viral, else pay huge sum and ruin his life. Investigation started and applicant was arrested and rupees two lakh was recovered from her which was given to her as extortion money.

After taking into consideration everything charges were framed under section 386, 507 of I.P.C. Having considered the rival submissions made by counsel for parties and taking into consideration the allegation made in the F.I.R and material collected during investigation and recovery of rupees two lakh clearly shows that prima facie offence under sections 386, 507 I.P.C is made out against applicant and the trial court has rightly framed charges.

It is also noted that at the stage of discharge the court has to consider the material only with a view to find out if there is a ground for presuming that the accused had committed the offence and not for the purpose of arriving at the conclusion that it is not likely to lead to conviction. There is absolutely no abuse of process of court in framing charges against the applicant.