Robbery And Dacoity
Q. Define and explain Robbery, Dacoity and extortion.(2001)(2001S)(2004/A)(2005/S)
Q. Distinguish between Robbery and Dacoity what Punishment are Provided for these offences.(1995)
Q. Discuss fully the Provisions under P.P.C relating to the offence of robbery and dacoity explaining the distinction between two. (2004/S)(2005/A)(2006/A)
Q. Explain robbery and Dacoity with particular reference to differences between both. (2007/A)
1. Introduction:
Robbery is a special and aggravated from of either theft or extortion and means felonious taking from the person of another or in his presence against his wall, by violence or putting him in fear, and it becomes dacoity when it is committed by five or more person co-jointly.
2. Relevant Provision:
Following are the relevant provision of P.P.C regarding the concerned topic.
Section 390 and 392 for Robbery.
Section 391 and 395 for Dacoity.
3. Robbery U/Sec 390:
In all robbery, there is either theft or extortion.
(I) When Theft Amounts To Robbery:
Where robbery as an aggravated from of theft is alleged, following things has to be proved.
(i) Theft:
Proof of theft is essential for convicting a person for robbery.
  1. Meaning of Theft u/sec 378:
Whoever intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’ s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, in said to commit theft.
  1. Ingredients of Theft:
Following are the ingredients of theft.
a)Dishonest intention to take property.
b)Property must be moveable
c) That should be in possession of another person
d)There must be removal or moving of that property
e) Without consent of the owner.
(ii) Death, Hurt or Wrongful Restraint:
Accused should in order to commit theft, either causes or attempts to cause any person’s death or hurt him or put him under a wrongful restraint.
  1. Meaning of Wrongful Restraint:
“ It implies an obstruction so as to prevent a person from proceeding in any direction where he has right to proceed.”
(iii)Fear of Death, Hurt or Wrongful Restraint:
There may be for o instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful to the victim to achieve the and specified in section 390.
(iv) For the Specified in Sec. 390:
The use of violence will not convert the offence of theft into robbery the violence he be committed for one of the ends specified in sec. 390 Viz to committing of theft carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by theft.
Illustration:
‘ A’ holds ‘Z’ down and fraudulently takes Z’s clothes without Z’s consent. Here ‘A’ has committed theft and in order to the committing of that theft, has voluntarily caused wrongful restraint to ‘Z’. ‘A’ has therefore committed robbery.
(II) When Extortion Amounts To Robbery:
Where robbery as an aggravated form of extortion is alleged, following things has to be proved.
(i) Extortion:
A proof of extortion is essential for convicting a person for robbery.
A. Meaning of Extortion u/sec 383:
Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person or to any other and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security or anything singed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits extortion.
(ii)Fear of Instant Death, Hurt or Wrongful Restraint:
There must be extortion by putting the person in fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person and they by doing so, induces the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
Illustration:
‘A’ object property from ‘Z’ by saying “Your child is in the hands of my gang and will be put to death unless you send us ten thousand Rs.”
This is extortion punishable as such but it is not robbery, unless ‘Z’ is put in fear of the instant death of his child.
(iii)Presence of person put in fear:
It is necessary that the extortion must be committed by the offender in the presence of the person put in fear and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, hurt or wrongful restraint. The offender is said to be present if he is sufficiently near to put the other person in fear of instant death, hurt or wrongful robbery.
Illustration:
‘A’ meets ‘Z’ on the high road, 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 extorted in his presence ‘A’ has therefore committed robbery.
(III)Punishment U/Sec 392:
Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years nor more than ten years and shell also be liable to fine and if the robbery be committed on the highway the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years.
Case La
2005 TLR 128
It was held that the offence of robbery though not compounable but compromise always considered as redeeming feature. An accused can be acquitted on the basis of Compromise between the parties.
4.Dacoity:
When five or more persons co-jointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery or where the whole number of persons co-jointly committed 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.
(I)Ingredients Of Dacoity:
(i)Five or More Persons:
Under this section, the number of persons committing robbery must be five or more. Where the evidence showed that there were six robbers but at the trial three were acquitted, it was held that the conviction under this section is not sustainable.
(ii)Committing or Attempting to Commit robbery:
Robbery becomes dacoity when it is committed by five or more persons. Even an attempted robbery by five or more persons amounts to an offence of dacoity and the fact that the dacoits failed to remove any booty is irrelevant.
(iii)Co-jointly Committing:
There should be co-jointly committing of offence of dacoity word co-jointly used in section 391 P.P.C means jointly.(1995 MLD 1779)
(II)Proof Of Dacoity:
A decoity begins as soon as there is an attempt to commit robbery. It is not necessary that the force or menace should be displayed by any overt act and it may be implied in the conduct of the mob.
(III)Punishment U/Sec 395:
Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life or which rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than four years nor more then years, and shell also be liable to fine.
(i)Jurisdiction of Court
Offence u/sec 395, being triable by the court of session, magistrate section 30 had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the same.(1995PrLj 1819)
5.Difference between Robbery And Dacoity:
(I)Number Of Persons:
In Robbery the number of persons are less than five. It may be committed by a single person.
In dacoity, the number of persons are five or more.
(II)Seriousness:
Robbery is less serious in nature.
Dacoity is more serious offence than robbery because of the terror caused by the presence number of offenders.
(III)Position Of Abettors:
In Robbery, the abettors are liable independently.
In dacoity abettors who are present and aiding when the crime is committed are counted in the number.
(IV)Jurisdiction Of Court:
Robbery may be triable by the illaqa magistrate.
Dacoity shall be triable by the court of session.
(V)Punishment:
Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years, nor more than ten years and shall also be liable to fine
Court while convicting a person u/sec 395, P.P.C, can either sentence him to imprisonment for life or to rigorous imprisonment which cannot be than fore years or more than ten years in addition to fine(1993 SCMR 1058)
(VI)Position In Highway:
If robbery is committed on the highway, the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years.
The fact that the Dacoity is committed on the highway, does not change the position or punishment.
6.Conclusion:
To conclude, I can say, that the definition of robbery contemplates that an accused should from very beginning have the intention to deprive another person of the property and to achieve that end, either hurt is caused or a person is placed. Under wrongful restraint, or it must be actually found that victim was put in fear of instant death, hurt or wrongful confinement when the same offence is committed by five or more serious in nature.

Sponsored Links