Introduction

• ‘Robbery’ is an aggravated form of either ‘theft’ and ‘extortion’ or of both.
• The essence of the offence of robbery is the presence of imminent fear or violence. A large proportion of robberies are a mixed case of aggravated form of theft and extortion.
• ‘Robbery’ committed by five or more people is a dacoity.

Robbery- Meaning.

According to Section 390 of Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC), in all robbery there is either theft or extortion.

• Conditions when theft is Considered as Robbery-
  • Theft is “robbery” if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
• Conditions when Extortion is Considered as Robbery
  • Extortion is “robbery” if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person, so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
• Illustrations
  • A holds Z down, and fraudulently takes Z’s money and jewels from Z’s clothes, without Z’s consent. Here A has committed theft, and, in order to commit that theft, has voluntarily caused wrongful restraint to Z. A has, therefore, committed robbery.
  • A meets Z on the high roads, shows a pistol, and demands Z’s purse. Z, in consequence, surrenders his purse. Here A has extorted the purse from Z by putting him in fear of instant hurt and being at the time of committing the extortion in his presence. A has, therefore, committed robbery.

Punishment for Robbery

• Section 392 prescribes the punishment for robbery. The maximum punishment for the offence of robbery shall be rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and fine as well.
• If the robbery is committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, it is considered an aggravating factor and the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years.

Attempt to Commit Robbery

• Section 393 punishes an attempt to commit robbery with rigorous imprisonment which may extend to seven years and also fine.
• It was observed by the Supreme Court in the case of Venu alias Venugopal v. State of Karnataka, (2008) that robbery is an aggravated form of offence of theft or extortion, and aggravation is in use of violence, of death, hurt or restraint. Violence must be in the course of theft and not subsequently. It is not necessarily violence must be committed even attempt is enough.

Punishment for being a Member of Gang of Thieves or Robbers

• Section 401 of the IPC punishes those who constitute a gang of thieves or robbers.
• It is not necessary to prove that each individual member of the gang has habitually committed theft or has committed any particular theft in the company with the other members.
• Being a member of the gang is enough for punishment. Punishment for being a member of a gang of thieves or robbers is imprisonment for a term up to seven years with fine.

Aggravated form of Robbery

• Section 394 is a special provision, which is applicable to cases where the offender has actually caused hurt to the victim for the purpose of committing robbery or in attempt to commit robbery.
• Whoever commits an offence under Section 394 shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable for fine.
• An offence punishable under Section 394 is not compoundable with or without the permission of the court concerned.
• Similarly, Section 397 and 398 do not create any specific offence but merely regulate the punishment already provided for robbery. These sections fix a minimum term of imprisonment when the commission of robbery has been attended with certain aggravating circumstances merely the use of deadly weapon, or the causing or grievous hurt or attempting to cause death or grievous hurt.
• Section 397 and Section 398 fixes the minimum punishment of imprisonment which shall not be less than seven years.

Dacoity

• Section 391 of IPC states that ‘when five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt, amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit dacoity.’

Essentials of Crime of Dacoity

• Five or more people should be concerned in the commission of the offence.
• Act must be robbery or attempt to commit robbery.
• Five persons must consist of those who themselves commit or attempt to commit robbery or those who are present and aid the principal actors in the commission or attempt of such robbery.

Punishment for Dacoity

• Section 395 of IPC provides punishment for dacoity. The maximum punishment for the offence of dacoity is life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable for fine.

Aggravated form of Dacoity

• Section 396 of IPC states that if any one of five or more persons, who are conjointly committing dacoity, commits murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Offences Connected with Dacoity

• Section 399, 400 and 402 are all provisions which deal with offences connected with dacoity.

Preparation to Commit Dacoity

• • Section 399 of the IPC states that whoever makes any preparation for committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
  • Ordinarily, preparation to commit an offence is not per se punishable. Dacoity is one of the few exceptions to the general rule.
  • Dacoity has been regarded as an offence so intrinsic against the interests of the public that the legislature has made a departure from the general rule and made even preparation to commit dacoity an offence punishable under IPC even if the people concerned do not proceed beyond the stage of preparation.
  • However, a mere assembly of persons carrying knives, choppers etc., does not attract Section 399 unless some act amounting to preparation is proved.

Belonging to Gangs of Dacoits

• • Section 400 of IPC states that whoever, at any time after the passing of the code, shall belong to a gang of persons associated for the purpose of habitually committing dacoity, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Assembling for Purpose of Committing Dacoity

• Section 402 of the IPC states that whoever, at any time after the passing of the code, shall be one of five or more persons assembled for the purpose of committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Minimum Sentence to be Awarded in Certain Cases of Dacoity

• Section 397 of the code states that if at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.

Attempt to Commit Robbery or Dacoity when Armed with Deadly Weapon

• Section 398 of the code states that if at the time of attempting to commit robbery or dacoity, the offender is armed with any deadly weapon, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.

Case Law

• Ram Shankar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1955):
  • In this case six people were charged with committing dacoity. Three out of the six people were acquitted. The charges framed did not indicate that along with the six people there were other unknown persons with them, who had committed dacoity.
  • The charges were that the six people, who were placed on trial, were the persons who had committed dacoity.
  • Since three persons were acquitted, there were only three other persons left as the persons involved with the crime. The SC held that the three persons could be convicted only to the lesser offence of robbery under Section 392 and not for dacoity under Section 395 of IPC.
• Ghotlu Modi v. State of Bihar (1985):
  • Patna High Court held that mere assembly of some persons sitting together in a lonely house under construction at night with some firearms, bombs etc., does not make out a case of conviction under Section 399 as there was no indication that they intended to commit dacoity.