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.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Rigorous imprisonment for not less than 7 years—Cog­nizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Court of Session—Non-compoundable.

COMMENTS

Deadly weapon

(i) There can be no quarrel that knife is a deadly weapon within the meaning of section 397; State of Maharashtra v. Vinayak Tukaram Utekar, (1997) 2 Crimes 615 (Bom).

(ii) An act would only fall within the mischief of this section if at the time of committing robbery or dacoity the offender—

(a) uses any deadly weapon; or

(b) causes grievous hurt to any person; or

(c) attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person; Shravan Dashrath Datrange v. State of Maharashtra, (1997) 2 Crimes 47 (Bom).

Purport behind word ‘uses’

What is essential to satisfy the word “uses” for the purposes of section 397, I.P.C. is the robbery being committed by an offender who was armed with a deadly weapon which was within the vision of the victim so as to be capable of creating a terror in the mind of victim and not that it should be further shown to have been actually used for cutting, stabbing, shooting, as the case may be; Ashfaq v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi), AIR 2004 SC 1253.

Recovery of weapon

When identification of articles alleged to have been recov­ered from accused is not properly proved nor victim could identi­fy accused in identification parade or in court accused cannot be convicted under section 397; Bhurekhan v. State of Madhya Pra­desh, AIR 1982 SC 948: (1982) Cr LJ 818: (1982) 1 SCC 174: (1982) SCC (Cr) 128.

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 1[imprisonment for life], or rigorous imprisonment for term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Death, imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Court of Session—Non-compoundable.

COMMENTS

Ingredients

When prosecution failed to establish any nexus between death and commission of dacoity charge under section 396 will fail; Wakil Singh v. State of Bihar, (1981) BLJ 462.

In circumstantial evidences utter importance is of linking of chain, as soon as the chain of link is broken, the value of circumstantial evidence gets reduced; State v. Lakshmisher Das, 1999 Cr LJ 2839 (Kant).

Punishment

On considering special facts of the case, i.e., the age of accused persons and their status in life as also their antecedents, sentence of 10 years in place of sentence of life imprisonment would meet the ends of justice; K.M. Ibrahim alias Bava v. State of Karnataka, 2000 Cr LJ 197 (Karn).

When it is evidentially proved that accused were participating in loot and murder during transaction of offence, each of them is liable to be punished under section 396; Kunwar Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1999 Cr LJ 3632 (MP).

————————

1. Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, sec. 117 and Sch., for “transporta­tion for life” (w.e.f. 1-1-1956).

Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Court of Session—Non-compoundable.

Comments

Witness

Where the presence of informant and other witnesses at the time and place of incident was established and their positive evidence regarding the way in which the dacoity was committed found reliable having no previous enmity with accused, no case of false implication established therefore, conviction of accused under section 395 was just and proper; Chhedu v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2000 Cr LJ 78 (All).

————————-

1. Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, sec.117 and sch., for “transportation for life” (w.e.f.1-1-1956).

If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person, and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable.

Comments

Ingredients

Not only the person who actually causes hurt but an associate of his/her would equally be liable for the mischief contemplated by this section; Shravan Dashrath Darange v. State of Maharashtra, (1997) 2 Crimes 47 (Bom).

Whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment—Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compound­able.