• No results found

PUNISHMENT FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF DACOITY

clearly postulates that when five or more

person conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery or where the whole number of

person 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.

 The offence of robbery is defined in section

390 IPC and as is clear from a perusal of the said section even a theft is robbery if during its commission the offender voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restrain or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restrain.

 Whereas robbery is punishable under section

392 IPC dacoity is punishable under se 395 of IPC.

PUNISHMENT FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF

DACOITY

Section 395 of the Indian penal code provides for punishment for dacoity. It says, whoever commits

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

It comes into play only when the prosecution makes out an offence under section 390 and the number of assailants reaches to the statutory minimum. The maximum punishment provided under this section is life imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years. Fine also be imposed. Dacoity is considered a very grave and serious crime and hence courts hence held that in cases of dacoity deterrent sentences is called for. In awarding

punishment for an offence under this section two things are to be considered:

1) Having regard to the gravity of the offence

committed the punishment that each individual deserves

2) On the facts and circumstances of a particular case whether an unusually heavy sentence is required to protect the interests of the public at large by acting as a deterrent to others.

Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code (Decoity with murder), deals with an aggravated form of dacoity. It says 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. In order to bring home the offence of dacoity with murder under section 396, it is not necessary to prove that the murder was committed by any particular member of the gang or that it was a common intention of the gang to commit the murder or that other members of the gang expected the murder to take place. Nor it is necessary to prove that murder was committed jointly by all the members of the gang. All that is required to be established by the prosecution is that the murder had been committed while

committing a dacoity. If that is established, then all the members of the gang, who have committed dacoity, are also equally liable for the murder under this section.

Dacoity with murder depends on facts and circumstances of the case:

In Shyam Bihari v state of Uttar Pradesh31

Facts of the case-The accused had entered the house with the intention of committing robbery. However, their attempt was foiled because of the hue and cry raised by the residents. All the

residents of the village and the neighbouring village arrived on the scene. The accused and his

companions without collecting their bootyran away from the house. They were chased by the residents and when they were crossing the ditch, one of the dacoits was caught by a villager. Thereupon,

another dacoit fired a pistol, which hit the villager killing him instantly.

The Supreme Court held that the transaction of the dacoity had endedthe moment the dacoits started fleeing, because this was a case where the dacoits escaped without the booty. A separate transaction took place when the accused shot dead the villager while crossing the ditch. It was, therefore, held that it was not a case of dacoity with murder under S 396. The accused was convicted under s 302, IPC. Section 397 deals with robbery or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt- This section says that if, at the time of committing

robbery or dacoity, the offender used 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 be less than seven years.

Section 398 deals with attempt to commit robbery or dacoity when armed with deadly weapon- the section says that if, at the time of attempting to

commit robbery and decoity, the offender is armed with any deadly weapon, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.

Both sections 397 and section 398 do not create substantive offence, but merely prescribe a

minimum sentence for the offence of robbery and dacoity mentioned in these sections. Under section 397 of IPC, if at the time of committing robbery or dacoity the offender uses any deadly weapons or causes grievous hurt or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt, he shall be liable to suffer a

minimum sentence of seven years imprisonment. The essentials of this section are as follow-

a) An offence of robbery or dacoity must have

been committed.

b) The offender should have taken part in the said

offence.

c) The offender should have used a deadly

weapons or cased grievous hurt or attempted to cause death or grievous hurt to any person at the time of committing a dacoity.

In Phool Kumar v Delhi Administration 32

the accused had entered a petrol pump. The first accused was armed with a knife while the second accused had small gun in his hand. The first

accused asked the employees of the petrol pump to hand over the keys. To terrorize the employees the second accused fired three shots in the air. One shot struck the window and two hit the ground. Thereafter they ransacked the office and decamped with the money, the question that arose for

consideration was whether the first accused that

was carrying a knife with him but did not use it for committing any over act would be covered under se 397. The Supreme Court held that in section 397 the words used were the offender uses whereas in section 398 the expression is armed with deadly weapons. Both the section provides minimum

sentences of seven years. The court held that first accused was carrying a knife, which was a deadly weapon open to the view of the victims sufficient to frighten or terrorise them. Any other overt act, such as, brandishing of the knife or causing grievous hurt with it, was not necessary to bring the offender under this section.

Section 397 covers the cases of completed offence of robbery or dacoity with the use of deadly

weapons. Section 398 covers the attempt to

commit robbery or dacoity armed with any deadly weapon. Under this section, any offender who is found guilty of attempting to commit robbery or dacoity, and is also found to be armed with deadly weapons, then the minimum sentence to be

awarded to such offender under s 398 is seven years.

Related documents