Indian Penal Code — Section 361
Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.—Whoever takes or entices any minor under 2[sixteen]
361. Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.—Whoever takes or entices any minor under 2[sixteen] years of age if a male, or under 3[eighteen] years of age if a female, or any person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such minor or person of unsound mind, without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap such minor or person from lawful guardianship.
Explanation.—The words “lawful guardian” in this section include any person lawfully entrusted with
the care or custody of such minor or other person.
Exception.—This section does not extend to the act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate child, or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled to the lawful custody of such child, unless such act is committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose.
Follow cited cases · Browse courts and years · Research topics
Judgments citing Section 361
- Komaldas Dahre v. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
- NIRMAL KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
- SUHAIL v. STATE
- Accused Xyz v. State of Chhattisgarh
- (BY SRI. SAMPANGI RAMAIAH N.S., ADVOCATE) v. R2 IS SERVED)
- Rajendra Kumar Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh
- SATISH TUMANE v. State Of Chhattisgarh
- Deepak Vaishnav v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Pawan Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Pawan Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Pawan Kumar & Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Pawan Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- State of Punjab v. Dr. (Ms.) Savi Nagpal, AAG, Punjab
- Chhattisgarh High Court · 2026
- MUKESH SINGHAL v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
- State Of Chhattisgarh v. Omprakash Maar
- State Of Chhattisgarh v. Omprakash Maar
- DEEP CHAND @ DEEPU v. STATE
- THE STATE OF KARNATAKA v. SRI. RAGHUVEER
- Mool Chandra @ Moola v. State of Uttarakhand
Text reproduced from the public statutes on which the corpus is built. Verify against the official Gazette before relying on it. This is statute reference, not legal advice.