ROBBERY

INTRODUCTION

As per Section 390 of Indian Penal code

Theft is "robbery" if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in
carving away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end,
voluntarily cause 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.

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.

Robbery is a form of theft that is accomplished by the use or threat of violence.

Legal definition

In modern English and American law the crime of robbery is generally defined by statute. The
definitions used are primarily of two kinds: those that are closely derived from the older English
common law, and those that have adopted modifications of the type recommended by the
American Law Institute's Model Penal Code. The California statute is typical of the common law
approach. Borrowing language almost word for word from Edward East's text of 1803, it defines
robbery as "the felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person
or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear" (1999). Other
statutes of this kind go into greater detail, while a few states, such as Virginia, leave the definition
almost wholly to the common law.

1
Under the older definitions, robbery requires proof of larceny, the principal common law form of
theft, plus two additional factors:

(1) That the taking by means of force or fear; and

(2) That the theft be from the person of the victim or from his immediate presence.

Punishment for Different Kinds of Robbery-

Section 392, punishment for robbery- lays down Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with
regrous imprisionment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine
and if the robbery be committed on the highway between unset and sunrise the imprisonment may
be extended to fourteen years.

Section 393, attempt to commit robbery- whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished
with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall be also be liable
to fine and f the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise the
imprisonment may ne extended to fourteen years.

An intention to rob coupled with some overt act short of robbery in furtherance of the intent is of
paramount importance for convicting a person under section. Attempts for offences under the
Indian penal code are punishable under section 511 where no express provision is made for
punishment of such attempts. This section expressly provides for punishment for attempts to
commit robbery. Section 511 would not apply to it. Robbery stands on a different footing from
dacoity in this respect as an attempt at dacoity is punishable as decoity.

2
Section 394 voluntarily causes hurt in committing robbery- this section says if any person in
committing in attempting to commit robbery voluntarily causes hurt such person and other person
jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery shall be punished with
[imprisonment for life] or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years
and shall also liable to fine.

There may be dacoity without hurt being caused but in the case of an offence under this section
sort is one of the essential elements if no hurt is caused no offence would be made out.

The History of Robbery

First listed as a plea of the Crown by Henry II in the twelfth century, robbery was one of the early
crimes under English law to be made punishable by the state rather than through compensation of
the injured party or through private vengeance. While not well defined at this time, robbery
probably required a taking by actual force from the person of the victim, and was punishable by
death or mutilation. It soon became a capital felony, however, and remained so in England—at
least in theory—until the great reforms of the 1830s, when the list of capital crimes was sharply
reduced. The last execution in England for simple robbery took place in 1836.

Although Roman law and other ancient codes recognized a crime similar to robbery, the older
Anglo-Saxon law did not always include the concept. At one point the distinction between thefts
done in the open (manifest) and thefts carried out in secret was more important. Unlike modern
law, which emphasizes the potential for violence in robbery, this distinction appears to have been
based on the greater certainty of proof available when the thief is caught red-handed.

In the United States, robbery was from colonial days a felony punishable by death. As late as the
early 1960s, ten states made some forms of robbery punishable by death. The punishment was far
from theoretical, as twenty-four persons were executed for robbery offenses between 1930 and
3
1962. Current constitutional doctrine would prohibit the execution of an offender convicted of
robbery only. However, when his accomplice kills someone in the course of their crime, a robbery
offender, under at least some circumstances, can be sentenced to death on a felony murder theory,
even if he did not himself intend the killing.

Robbery as a separate category embodying theft by violence is contained in the codes of many
countries and cultures, both ancient and modern. This method of categorization is not universal,
however, and some important legal systems have done without it. Thus, although German and
Soviet law have long treated robbery as a separate crime, French law does not. Theft with violence
is considered an aggravated form of theft but not a separate crime.

Elements of Robbery

• The taking, with the intent to steal, of;

• The personal property of another;

• From his or her person or in their presence;

• Against his or her will;

• By violence, intimidation or the threat of force.

Robbery is an aggravated form of either theft or extortion. The opening words of Section 390, IPC,
show that there cannot be any robbery, if there is no theft or extortion. Both in theft and extortion,
dishonesty is an essential ingredient. So, if there is no element of dishonesty in an act, there can
be no offence of theft or extortion and consequently there cannot be an offence of robbery.
Similarly, removal of movable property from the possession of another is a necessary element to

4
constitute an offence of theft. If this element is absent, then there is no theft and consequently,
there will be no robbery either. Thus in order to verify whether a particular act would amount to a
robbery or not, one has to first establish that the offence has ingredients of theft or extortion, since
robbery s nothing but an aggravated form of theft and extortion. Theft or extortion or attempt to
commit any one of the two is an inevitable ingredient of robbery. Causing Death, Hurt or Wrongful
Restraint or Fear Thereof

One of the essential ingredients to constitute the offence of robbery is that the offender should
have caused to any person death, hurt or wrongful restraint, or the fear of instant death or instant
hurt or instant wrongful restraint. Only when such element exist, the offence of theft would be
robbery and not otherwise.

Section 390 will apply only if the death, hurt or wrongful restraint or fear thereof is caused for the
purpose of achieving the end object of commission of theft or carrying away the stolen property.
The words ‘for that end’ are thus very crucial, which distinguish a case of theft accompanied with
assault which is covered by Sections 379 and 323 from that of robbery. Thus, if the death, hurt or
wrongful restraint has not been caused for the end of achieving the object of theft or carrying away
the stolen property, then it will not amount to an offence of robbery under Section 390, IPC.

Possession of Stolen Property

Possession of stolen property has always been considered as sufficient presumptive evidence to
prove the commission of theft and robbery.

5
 Types of Robbery

There are many types of robbery. In all cases, an individual takes possession or ownership of a
piece of property to which he or she is not entitled. In crimes of false pretense, perpetrators obtain
ownership rights through an act of deception that pertains to facts about the past or present. The
transfer of title for that property is obtained through fraudulent acts.

In crimes of larceny, the perpetrator takes possession of property for which he or she does not have
possession rights. For example, the owner of a boat may take it to a marina to have it fixed. Once
the work has been completed, the owner retrieves the boat without paying the bill. The owner is
Guilty of larceny because he or she does not have possession rights until the bill is paid for the
work that has already been completed on the boat.

Robbery also includes the perpetrators taking possession of property for which they do not have
possession rights. However, robbery often includes force. Aggravated robbery and armed robbery
are similar in nature because the perpetrator utilizes force or the threat of force in order to gain
victim compliance. Armed robbery includes possession of a deadly weapon or the perceived
possession of a deadly weapon, even if one is not present. Generally, bank robberies, which are
Federal crimes, involve armed robbery.

Burglary is different from robbery because burglary does not generally include contact between
the robber and the victim. Burglary is an inchoate offense, which means that the crime is committed
in order to prepare for completion of another crime. There are many offenses that can proceed
burglary, and the crime does not have to include theft. Even if the burglar never commits the
intended, additional offense, they can still be charged with burglary.

6
Piracy is another type of theft in which the victim rarely comes face to face with the perpetrator.
Piracy is a crime in which theft is committed by violating copyright laws. Copyright infringement
is a serious criminal offense, but it is rarely prosecuted due to the nature of the crime.

Piracy is a serious problem that is widespread in the entertainment industry. Illegal copies of
artistic creations are circulated on a mass level and easily obtained by any member of the general
public. Although pirated copies are often cheaper than original works, the artist receives no
payment from those copies.

 False Pretenses

Crimes of false pretense involve an individual that obtains ownership rights to property by taking
place in an act of fraud. Crimes of false pretense often involve an act of deception that directly
results in an individual giving up the ownership rights to a piece of property as a direct result of
that act of deception. In other words, the crime only qualifies as a crime of false pretense if the
transfer of ownership is a direct result of an act of deception by the person that has obtained
ownership of that property.

In order to be prosecuted for a crime of false pretense, an individual must be aware that they are
making the false statement. For example, a person cannot be charged if they realistically believed
what they told the rightful owner, even if it was false. The perpetrator must have been aware that
they were taking part in a deception that would result in the loss of property of the rightful owner.

The deception that resulted in the transfer of property must have been passed on as A past fact, or
a fact that pertains to the present. In other words, a person cannot be charged with committing a

7
crime of false pretense based on promises they make about the future. The perpetrator must have
taken part in deception about an actual and existing fact.

Any promise made about the future is not based in fact because nobody can know for sure what
will happen in the future. In contrast to robbery, this crime involves the actual transfer of
ownership, rather than simple possession. In addition, the property must have some pecuniary
significance. The property must have some monetary value, no matter how small.

The perpetrator must also have intent to defraud the victim. In other words, the perpetrator must
have had the motive of gaining the rights to a piece of property by taking part in deception that
would affect the rightful owner of that property.

If however, the rightful owner had suspicions about that specific deception, no crime has been
committed because they were not actually deceived. A person that has doubt and transfers the
property anyway has not been deceived, and therefore, the actions necessary to complete a crime
of false pretense have not been met.

Crimes of false pretense have changed names as laws change, but the basic premise remains the
same. In the Theft Acts of 1968 and 1978, the United Kingdom's government sought to better
define crimes of theft. Crimes of false pretense have also been known as crimes of deception, or
crimes of fraud. Whatever they are known as, the results are the same. A perpetrator deceives the
rightful owner of a valuable piece of property into giving up those property rights.

 Larceny

Larceny is a crime in which the perpetrator gains possession of a piece of property, but not
ownership rights. The larcenist takes possession of the property without permission from the
owner, or with permission of the owner but for purposes contrary to that permission.

8
The perpetrator may have asked to borrow a piece of jewelry for some specific event and instead
sold that piece of jewelry even though they did not have ownership of that jewelry. The perpetrator
did have permission to possess the jewelry, but only for a certain period of time. They were also
expected to return the jewelry.

A person is also guilty of larceny if they take part in asportation of property. Asportation is the
movement of property that a person does not have possession rights to. For example, a person
may own a vehicle that has been impounded because a ticket has not been paid. The owner does
not have possession rights of that vehicle. If that individual were to go to the impound lot and
move the car, they are guilty of asportation.

Another principle involved in larceny is that the perpetrator takes possession of a piece of property
to which another individual has possession rights. In other words, a person is not guilty of larceny
if they take possession of a piece of property that has been abandoned or discarded.

However, an individual that takes possession of a piece of property that may have been lost could
be guilty of larceny if they do not make reasonable efforts to reunite that property with the person
that has possession rights. The perpetrator must also intend to permanently deprive a person of
possession of the piece of property. For example, a person that finds a piece of jewelry and picks
it up to bring home is not yet guilty of larceny. That individual may be bringing that piece of
property home in order to make an attempt to find the owner.

That person must take the item home and make no attempt to find the individual that has possession
rights before they could be guilty of larceny. That fact can sometimes be difficult to prove. Perhaps,
if that individual were to wear that piece of jewelry, it could be assumed that they intended to
permanently deprive someone of that property.

9
There are many types of larceny but all involve some of the same elements and all involve an
individual taking possession of a piece of property of which they do not have the possession rights.
There are some individuals that take possession by acts of stealth.

A pickpocket commits larceny by stealth because the crime is often undetected until much later.
In other words, larceny by stealth involves a perpetrator that is not witnessed during the
commission of the crime. Although people may have actually seen the pickpocket, they probably
did not realize that the crime took place.

Theft by an employee or servant can also include stealth, but it does not have to. Theft by
employees is rather common. Office supplies are frequently taken home by employees with a
purpose that does not involve work. Even employees that use their work phone to make long
distance calls that are not in reference to their job are guilty of petty larceny. Employees that steal
items such as printers would be guilty of grand larceny.

For example, a trucker that has been hired to transfer toys from a warehouse to a toy store does
not have the right to remove even a single toy from that delivery. If the trucker were to remove
anything from that shipment, that would be considered theft by bailee.

Theft by a finder involves a person finding a piece of property for which they know they do not
have possession rights. If that person can reasonably believe that the property has been abandoned,
then no crime has been committed. If, however, that person believes that the property has been lost
or misplaced, they must make a reasonable effort to reunite the property with the person that has
possession rights in order to avoid larceny charges.

One of the most common forms of larceny is larceny by trick. In that type of larceny, the
perpetrator is granted possession rights, but takes possession for a purpose contrary to that for
which permission was granted. For example, a person that borrows a car for a doctor’s

10
Appointment, but instead uses it to rob a bank, would be guilty of theft by deception, among other
charges.

 Armed Robbery

Armed robbery is generally the charge against a perpetrator that utilizes a weapon during the
commission of a robbery. Robbery is the taking of property through the use of force, or threat of
force. Armed robbers use a weapon to gain victim compliance.

In fact, armed robberies do not even have to present a weapon to face the most serious of robbery
charges. For example, a robber that pretended that a hand in his pocket held a gun would be charged
with armed robbery. In order to be charged with armed robbery, the victims must simply believe
that the robber had a deadly weapon and acted accordingly.

Prosecution for armed robbery will vary according to each jurisdiction. Bank robberies that include
the use of a weapon will be prosecuted by the Federal Government. In fact, any bank robbery is
considered a Federal crime because the Government insures banks, and therefore, bank robbery is
a Federal crime.

Banks and other institutions have taken many precautions to prevent robbery. Many buildings now
have double doors that can trap a robber while they try to escape. In addition, many buildings now
have twenty-four hour surveillance so that no one can enter undetected. There are also silent alarms
in many buildings which employees can hit without alerting the criminal.

Homes and businesses should take similar precautions to avoid becoming the victim of an armed
robber. While homes may not have metal detectors, they can add security such as alarm systems.
Any structure should also be clear of easy hiding spots for robbers such as shrubs and darkened
areas.

11
Statistics indicate that most armed bank robberies occur in the early morning hours, especially on
Fridays, whereas armed robberies of businesses tend to happen in the late evening hours. Those
statistics will vary according to the security and other precautions of businesses attempting to
prevent such crimes. Armed robbers, like other criminals, look for an easy target.

 Aggravated Robbery

Robbery is very similar to other crimes, but it has some defining characteristics. The crime of
robbery involves a perpetrator taking property from the person that has possession rights to the
property while using force or threatening the use of force.

The robber generally comes face to face with their victim, unlike a burglar. In many jurisdictions,
there is no distinction between armed robbery and aggravated robbery.When there is a distinction
made, it is generally that aggravated robbery includes the threat of force in the absence of a deadly
weapon being presented or threatened.

In either case, aggravated robbery generally has sentencing guidelines similar to armed robbery,
depending on other intervening factors of the crime. Aggravated robbery can also include a felony
murder charge. If a victim dies as a result of the commission of any felony crime, the charge will
be felony murder. Generally, charges of that nature include a sentence of life in prison.

Aggravated robbery can also result in kidnapping to aid the perpetrator in escaping from law
enforcement or any one that is in pursuit. If the victim is transported across State lines, the charges
will be prosecuted in Federal court.

Aggravated robbery is a violent felony and can often occur in addition to other violent crimes.
Unfortunately, the mind set of many of the perpetrators is that once they have begun the crime,
there is no turning back. Therefore, they are likely to do anything that will help them escape,
including killing innocent bystanders or law enforcement that are in pursuit.

12
  Burglary

Burglary involves the illegal entry of a structure with the intent of committing another crime. The
other crimes include a number of possible intents. For example, a burglar may enter a structure
with the intention of kidnapping a victim and holding them for ransom. While the crime of burglary
can include violent offenses, the other crime is usually theft. The possibility of varying intents is
the reason that burglary is considered an inchoate offense.

An inchoate offense in one that is committed with the purpose of committing another crime.
Burglary, as an element of other crimes, can precede murder, assault, sexual assault, kidnapping,
and murder. In fact, burglary can result in numerous other offenses.

Theft is not an element required for a crime to be classified as burglary. Burglary is simply the
entering Of a structure, in the absence of permission to enter said structure. Burglary can even be
charged against an individual that has permission to enter a structure, but does so with a purpose
contrary to that for which permission was granted.

The charges against a burglar will vary depending on many factors. The laws that govern burglary
will vary according to jurisdiction and differ slightly in each State. The differences often become
evident when examining the sentencing guidelines within each jurisdiction.

In some states, nighttime burglary receives a much harsher punishment than a similar crime during
the day. In addition, the crime that proceeds the burglary will greatly effect the sentence of the
perpetrator. Burglars generally receive a less harsh punishment than robbers. The difference
between the crimes can be great.

First, robbers come face to face with their victims and use the threat of force, or actual force, in
order to get victims to comply with their demands, whereas burglars generally do not come face
to face with their victims, depending on the nature of their proceeding crime. Obviously a burglar
that intends to assault, murder, or kidnap a victim will likely receive a much harsher punishment

13
than a robber. But the distinction between the two crimes can blur at sentencing because they are
both felonies and both crimes can end up being equally violent.

Requirements For Robbery

 Use Of Force Or Fear

 Taking From Person Or Presence
 Aggravated Robbery

Use Of Force Or Fear:- The central requirement of robbery is that the taking be by means of
either force or fear. One common type of robbery involving force is mugging, in which the robber
grabs the victim around the neck from the rear and forcibly removes his wallet or other valuables.
Other common kinds of force involve striking a victim with the fists, a gun, or a blunt object.

Like any other category of crime, robbery presents a number of situations in which it is difficult
to determine whether or not there is in fact a robbery. In these boundary situations, if there is no
robbery there is generally some other crime rather than no crime at all. If the victim's purse is
snatched, for example, it is often difficult to determine whether the force necessary for robbery
has been used. If the purse is snatched quickly so that the victim offers no resistance, the common
law and many American states find that there has been no robbery and that the crime is instead
larceny from the person. If the victim struggles to hold on to the purse, however, so that the thief
must jerk it loose, the common law and virtually all the American states find that a robbery has
been committed.

Historically, these lines were drawn at a time when robbery was a capital crime and common law
judges were reluctant to paint with too broad a brush, and the distinctions consequently emphasize
formal logic more than the actual or potential harm. The elderly women who are often the victims

14
of purse-snatchings tend to be badly shaken by the experience even if "force" is not used, but this
has not as yet caused any widespread change in the distinctions made.

Picking a victim's pocket is generally not considered robbery because there is no use of fear and
because robbery requires more force than that necessary simply to remove the property. However,
if the thief jostles the victim in the taking, or if the victim notices the attempt and resists, the crime
is robbery.

Fear or intimidation is an alternative to the use of force. The most common situation is the holdup,
in which the robber threatens to shoot if valuables are not turned over. The threat may be implied
rather than stated verbally, but it generally must be to do immediate rather than future harm. The
threat may concern the property holder, members of his family, or another person who is present,
and must generally concern death or bodily injury of some kind rather than an injury to reputation.
Other threats—to prosecute the victim, to do future harm, or to expose the victim's sordid past if
he fails to pay—may constitute blackmail or extortion but are not robbery.

Most American states do not require that the victim actually be afraid. If the victim is not
frightened, it is enough that he be aware of the impending harm. Even a slight threat is enough to
constitute robbery, however, if it causes the victim to part with money or valuables.

It is sometimes said that robbery is a crime that combines both larceny and assault, but this is not
strictly true. Some threats that are not sufficient to constitute an assault are sufficient for the crime
to be robbery.

Another definitional problem involves thefts from persons who are unconscious because of their
own acts of drinking or drug-taking. If money is simply removed from the person of such a victim,
the crime is not robbery because there is no force or fear. If force is used to move the victim in
order to find his money or to gratuitously inflict harm, however, as is often done in skid-row drunk
rolls, the definition of robbery under most statutes would appear to be met, despite the lack of
awareness on the part of the victim. If the victim is either drugged or knocked unconscious by the
thief in order to secure the victim's property, it is clear that the crime is robbery.

15
Taking From Person Or Presence:- The second common law requirement for robbery is
that the taking be from the person or the immediate presence of the victim. Property is considered
taken from the victim's person if it is taken from his hand or clothing or from a place where it was
discarded while the victim was in flight from the robber. The victim's "presence" is considered to
be his area of immediate control. Property is not generally found to be taken from the victim's
person or presence if it is located some distance away. Consequently, if a victim held by a gunman
directs by telephone that property in a remote warehouse be delivered to the gunman's confederate,
the crime, under the traditional rule, is not robbery. Taking the real issue to be the use of force or
fear, however, the Model Penal Code, the Theft Act, 1968, c. 60 (Great Britain), and a number of
states have dropped the requirement that property be taken from the person or presence of the
victim. This solves some problems but leaves open the question as to how close in time and place
the use of force or fear must be to the taking for the crime to be robbery.

Larceny problems. Because larceny is a component of robbery, all the problems that exist in
defining larceny are also problems in defining robbery. The common law rules that prevent the
taking of real property or services from being larceny, for example, may also prevent the forcible
taking of these things from being robbery. Similarly, since a taking that results from an erroneous
but honest claim of ownership is not a theft because there is no intent to deprive the rightful owner,
such a taking with force is not a robbery in most states because there is no theft.

If the older, more technical rules concerning larceny have been replaced with a single, more
comprehensive concept of theft, there may be other problems. The wrongful failure to return
borrowed property, for example, was not larceny under the older law but is included in many
modern definitions. This raises the question as to whether a borrower who has wrongfully refused
to return property commits a robbery if he threatens to beat up the owner for trying to recover his
property. Similar questions may arise when the property was initially obtained by fraud or trickery
and when force is used or threatened to keep the victim from regaining the property.

Unlike burglary but like other common law thefts, robbery requires that property actually be taken
by the offender. If force or fear is employed but property not taken, there may be an assault or an

16
attempted robbery, but at common law and in most states there is no robbery. The Model Penal
Code and the statutes of some states have recognized that the harm to the person is the same
whether the theft is completed or not, and have defined the crime to include the incomplete theft
as well as the completed one.

Aggravated Robbery Many statutes provide stiffer penalties for particularly threatening
robberies. Some factors that aggravate robbery in this way are use of a dangerous weapon,
infliction of serious bodily harm, intent to kill, the presence of accomplices, or the choice of an
especially vulnerable target such as a person on a train or bus, or an elderly person. In many of the
newer criminal codes some of these same factors now serve as aggravating factors for crimes in
general, as well as specific aggravating factors for robbery. This overlap sometimes raises the
question as to whether the presence of an aggravating factor such as the use of a gun should result
in one additional penalty or two—as aggravation under the robbery statute only, or under both the
robbery statute and the general law.

Robbery is generally viewed as a crime against the person threatened. Consequently, if there is
more than one victim, many states allow multiple charges to be filed and multiple sentences to be
imposed.

When Theft Is 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.

17
When Extortion Is 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,
or 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.

Explanation:
The offender is said to be present if he is sufficiently near to put the other person in fear of instant
death, or of instant hurt, or of instant Wrongful restraint.

Illustrations:
(a) 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 the committing of that theft, has voluntarily
caused wrongful restraint to Z. A has therefore committed robbery.

(b) 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 extortion in his presence. A has therefore committed
robbery.

(c) A meets Z and Z’s child on the high road. A takes the child, and threatens to fling it down a
precipice, unless Z delivers his purse. Z, in consequence, delivers his purse. Here A has extorted
the purse from Z, by causing Z to be in fear of instant hurt to the child who is there present. A has
therefore committed robbery on Z.

(d) A obtains 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 rupees.” This is extortion, and punishable as such: but it
is not robbery, unless Z is put in fear of the instant death of his child.

18
Causes Of Robbery

Robbery is the stealing of money or property from someone with the use of force.

Robberies are fairly common crimes, and there are several causes of robbery which differ from
one crime to another. Here are some of the most common causes of robbery.The present recession
and unemployment problems which have plagued everyone might have instilled a sense of
desperation in an otherwise previously hard working and employed person. This might be a motive
to commit a robbery in order to feed oneself or look after one’s family through tough times.

Another category of robbers are those who are just lazy, and are habitual thieves, looking to make
quick money without any effort. These people are repeat offenders and they usually drift around
committing burglaries and other types of theft as well.

Drug addicts are usually potential thieves to support their drug habit if they do not hold down a
job or have other ways to earn money in order to pay for their habit. The desperation for the next
fix is very severe and usually clouds one’s judgment and leads to robbery.

Sometimes there crimes are committed by those who have some form of mental deficiency or lack
morals etc. and these kinds of offenders sometimes undertake burglaries just for the violence
involved in the crime, where the money is not an important factor. Sometimes peer pressure among
teens also leads to robberies, with robbers historically being looked up to in society. Another
common type of offender is one from the lower economic bracket of society who is just looking
to better his or her lifestyle.

Differences between Robbery and dacoity

 For an offence of dacoity, minimum number of the miscreants required is five. The term
dacoity is defined in section 391 IPC which 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.
19
  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.

CASES:-

 Sikander Kumar vs. State [1998 (3) Crimes 69 Delhi HC]

The prosecution was that the two appellants pointed a knife at the complainant and took Rs. 50/-
and drove away the auto of the complainant. Next day the accused were arrested in Nakabandi in
presence of complainant. One independent witness turned hostile.

The trial Court imposed punishment against Sikander Kumar and other accused. On appeal, the
Delhi High Court set aside the conviction, opining that entire prosecution story was inherently
improbable and unbelievable. It would be unsafe to place total reliance on testimony of
complainant to base conviction as one independent witness turned hostile.

 Attempt to commit robbery:

Sec. 393 says that 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. The
offence under this Section is cognizable, non-bailable, non-compoundable, and triable by
Magistrate of the first class.

 Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery:

According to Sec. 394, if the offender while committing robbery voluntarily causes hurt to the
complainant, such offender shall be punished with imprisonment with life or with rigorous

20
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and also fine. The offence under this
Section is cognizable, non-bailable, non-compoundable, and triable by Magistrate of the first class.

 Omprakash vs. State (1978 CrLJ 797 All.)

In this case, the accused committed a high-way robbery. They looted the passengers of the bus.
The trial Court imposed punishment for life. On appeal High Court upheld it.

 Narayan Prasad vs. State of M.P. (AIR 2006 SC 204)

Brief Facts: The accused did robbery and also killed the wife of the complainant. The complainant
identified the accused in the Identification Parade. The accused showed the stolen property.

Recovery effected at the instance of accused not claimed by them, except one N who claimed that
those were purchased by him under receipt. One of the PWs hostiled. The accused were convicted
by the trial Court and it was confirmed by the High Court.

 Om Praksh v. state of utttarpradesh AIR 1956 ALL 163.

It has decided what are the criteria which take a case in an offence of robbery? In this case persons
had charged for dacoity, two of them were acquitted, the court said that for the dacoity there must
be 5 persons.

Conclusion

Overall, the variation in robberies and the levels on which robbery can be understood leave much
room for scientific inquiry regarding the distribution of robberies across places, how individuals
come to choose to commit robbery, how robbers develop targets, and how offenders and victims
behave in individual encounters. These are a sampling of possible questions that could arise in the
context of studying robbery and a set of theoretical frameworks from which the questions can be
understood.

21