Whoever habitually receives or deals in property which he knows or has reason to believe to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine
IPC Section 413: Simplified Explanation
IPC Section 413 addresses the offence of habitually dealing in stolen property. This section targets individuals who regularly buy, receive, possess, or deal with property they know or have reason to believe is stolen. The chronic nature of these actions signifies a pattern of criminal behaviour that supports and perpetuates the market for stolen goods, making it a critical point of intervention for law enforcement.
Is IPC Section 413 bailable?
IPC Section 413 is non-bailable. The habitual aspect of dealing with stolen property indicates a persistent involvement in criminal activities that pose a significant risk to public safety and order, necessitating strict judicial control over the accused’s release.
IPC Section 413 Punishment
The punishment under IPC Section 413 involves imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending to ten years and includes a liability to a fine. This severe penalty reflects the seriousness of continuously facilitating and benefiting from the circulation of stolen goods, contributing to ongoing criminal enterprises.
Example of IPC Section 413
A real-life example of IPC Section 413 involved a man who operated a second-hand goods store in a major city. Over time, law enforcement noticed an unusually high number of items reported stolen were resurfacing in his store. An undercover investigation revealed that the store owner was well-known among local thieves as a buyer of stolen goods, regularly purchasing items without questioning their origin. His store had become a known hub for offloading stolen property, from electronics to jewellery. When arrested, the evidence of his chronic dealing in stolen goods led to charges under IPC Section 413. In court, given his role in sustaining the local theft ecosystem, he was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined, highlighting the law’s focus on dismantling networks that enable and profit from property crimes.
