Punishment for misappropriation of money or materials, etc
Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 deals with punishment for misappropriation of money or materials, etc. Whoever, being entrusted with any money or materials, or otherwise being, in custody of, or dominion over, any money or goods, meant for providing relief in any threatening disaster situation or disaster, misappropriates or appropriates for his own use or disposes of such money or materials or any p The Act came into force on 28 Jul 2006.
Whoever, being entrusted with any money or materials, or otherwise being, in custody of, or dominion over, any money or goods, meant for providing relief in any threatening disaster situation or disaster, misappropriates or appropriates for his own use or disposes of such money or materials or any part thereof or wilfully compels any other person so to do, shall on conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 1[one years], and also with fine.
Section 53, The Disaster Management Act, 2005 (Act 53 of 2005).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Dr M.K. Pushpitha v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
DMA s.53 (misappropriation of disaster-relief money/materials) is non-cognizable; police cannot search/seize/arrest without Magistrate permission under CrPC 155(2) and without first registering FIR—investigation before FIR violates Lalita Kumari and Article 21, so an FIR padding IPC theft/cheating counts onto a pure s.53 vaccine-misuse allegation is quashed, leaving administrative action open.
On this section: s.53 is the sole DMA offence held attracted on the vaccine black-market facts; procedural illegality in investigating that non-cognizable offence grounds quash.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 53
What have the courts held on Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act?
Dr M.K. Pushpitha v. State of Karnataka & Anr. (04 Aug 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.53 is the sole DMA offence held attracted on the vaccine black-market facts; procedural illegality in investigating that non-cognizable offence grounds quash.
How do I find court cases under Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Disaster Management Act 2005 53, section 53 Disaster Management Act 2005, section 53 of the Disaster Management Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Dr M.K. Pushpitha v. State of Karnataka & Anr. (04 Aug 2021).
When did Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act come into force?
Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act, cited as Disaster Management Act 2005 53, came into force on 28 Jul 2006, having been enacted on 23 Dec 2005. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions1200 words
- 30. Powers and functions of District Authority861 words
- 6. Powers and functions of National Authority703 words
- 42. National Institute of Disaster Management566 words
- 66. Payment of compensation533 words
- 18. Powers and functions of State Authority473 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 17 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.