This article has been written by Ms. Akanksha Choudhary, a 3rd year BA.LLB (Hons.) Student from CMR University, School of Legal Studies, Bengaluru.
Robbery is basically an unlawful taking of another person’s personal belongings from the person or immediate vicinity against that person’s will, done so using force or fear. Robbery is a crime that is covered in Section 390 of the IPC, 1860. Theft or extortion are the two ways that defines robbery. Theft is considered robbery if the offender wilfully causes or attempts to cause the death, injury, or wrongful restraint of any person as a result of the theft, the theft itself, the taking of the property obtained through the theft, or the carrying away or attempting to carry away of the property. Section 390 defines robbery as:
“Robbery. — In all robbery there is either theft or extortion.
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.
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, 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, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.”
Illustration
- 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.
- 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.
Essentials of Robbery
- There must have been theft in the sense of Section 378.
- The theft should aim at causing or attempting to cause fear of death, harm, or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death, instant hurt, or instant wrongful restraint.
- There must also have been extortion in the sense of Section 383 while the offender was in the person’s presence, and the offender must have done this while the person was present and the person must now fear instant death, instant hurt, or instant wrongful restrain.
Punishment
Extortion is robbery if the offender places the victim in fear of immediate death, immediate injury, or immediate wrongful restraint to that person or to another person and, by doing so, compels the victim to deliver up the thing extorted on the spot. This occurs when the offender is present when the victim is put in fear. The penalty for robbery is addressed in Section 392 of IPC. According to Section 392, robbery is punishable by harsh imprisonment for a time that may last up to ten years and a fine. The penalty could be raised to 14 years if the robbery occurred on a public street between the hours of sunrise and dusk. The fine clause in this Section is a “must” requirement, making payment of the fine compulsory. This needs to be stressed. Yet, compared to other offenses that result in death and carry relatively light punishments, such as death by Negligence, the amount of the sentence for robbery is significantly higher. The penalty for intentionally causing harm while conducting or attempting to commit robbery is outlined in Section 394 of the IPC. Section 397 of the IPC specifies the punishment for causing death or attempting to cause death or great bodily harm to anyone. Section 398 of the IPC specifies the punishment if the criminal is equipped with any deadly weapon while attempting to commit robbery.
Theft
According to Section 378 of the Indian Criminal Code, 1860, theft is a property offense. “The dishonest removal of someone’s movable property from their possession without that person’s agreement” is the definition of theft. Even if the owner of the stolen item may suffer unfair losses, theft does not necessarily result in unfair advantages for the offender. A thief in good faith offers stolen goods to the public with the aim of fostering public benefit, but they do not turn the crime into a charitable gesture. That was an intentional act of dishonestly taking someone else’s moveable property out of the property holder’s possession without that person’s consent, thus it still counts as theft.
When Theft is Robbery?
Theft becomes robbery when the offender intentionally causes or attempts to cause instantaneous death, wrongful restraint, or harm, or intentionally creates fear of such harm, in the course of committing the theft, while the theft is being committed, or while carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained through theft. Consequently, when the following circumstances occur, theft becomes robbery:
- When a person commits a crime with the intent to cause death, wrongful restraint, or harm; cause fear of immediate death, wrongful restraint, or harm.
- And the aforementioned act(s) are committed: o while committing the theft; o while perpetrating the theft; o while carrying away property obtained through theft; or o while attempting to carry away property obtained through theft.
For example, A restrains Z and steals his money and valuables from his clothes without his consent. In this scenario, A has committed theft and voluntarily subjected Z to undue constraint. As a result of this, A has committed robbery.
Extortion
One kind of theft violation is extortion. Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 defines extortion. Threats and other forms of coercion are employed to get goods, cash, or services from an individual or group. The extortion victim is not required to accept payment, goods, or services. Extortion can be perpetrated by telling a person or a group to give something—like money, goods, or services—to someone else. The attacker incites the victim to fear death, harm, or unjustified restraint in order to obtain valued assets like money, property, or services.
When Extortion is Robbery?
When the person who is being put in fear is present when the extortion is being committed and the offender puts that person in fear of immediate death, immediate wrongful restraint, or immediate harm to that person or another person, the extortion turns into robbery and the victim is forced to deliver the stolen item immediately. The following conditions must be satisfied for extortion to become robbery:
- When someone uses fear of imminent death, cruel constraint, or harm to coerce money from another.
- The thief then convinces the terrified person to give up the property there and then.
- At the time of extortion, the perpetrator is in close proximity to the individual who has been made afraid.
Illustration: A meets Z and Z’s child on the high road. A kidnap the child and threatens to hurl it down a cliff if Z does not return his purse. As a result, Z gives over his purse. A has extorted money from Z by making Z scared of causing immediate harm on the present child. As a result, A has stolen from Z. If A obtains property from Z by telling him, “Your child is in the hands of my gang and will be executed until you pay us 10,000 rupees,” This is extortion, and it is illegal; yet, it is not robbery until Z is forced to fear the unexpected death of his child.
Judicial Pronouncements
State of Maharashtra vs. Joseph Mingel: In this instance, it was decided that all five elements listed in Section 378, which is regarded as theft, had to be shown in order to establish robbery by stealing. Robbery under Section 390 cannot be considered to have happened if any one of the five components of Section 378 is lacking.
Ram Baran vs. Emperor: A large group of Muslims who were transporting cattle along a public road were attacked by a crowd of individuals motivated by religious beliefs. The crowd then violently grabbed the cattle belonging to the Muslim populace. Instead of being a case of murderous robbery, this was determined to be a case of dacoity.
Abdul Rashid vs. Nausar Ali: In this instance, a person with a weapon had invaded the plaintiff’s field and was chopping down the crops. Nonetheless, it was found that this did not constitute robbery but rather stealing because the element of danger was missing.
Ezhil vs. State of Tamil Nadu: The defendants were accused with breaking Indian Criminal Code Articles 364, 392 and 302, as well as Sections 34 and 120 B. Given the close proximity of the time when the murder was supposed to have been committed and the body discovered, as well as the articles recovered from the accused’s possession, the Supreme Court held that a presumption can be drawn not only that they were in possession of the stolen articles after committing robbery but also that they committed murder of the deceased. As a result, the accused’s convictions under Articles 302 and 392 read in conjunction with Section 34 were legal.
Sikander Kumar vs. State: The prosecution asserts that the two appellants threatened the complainant with a knife, took Rs. 50, and fled in the vehicle. The following day, while the complainant was present, the accused were taken into custody in Nakabandi. One unflinching witness turned hostile. The trial Court handed down sentences to Sikander Kumar and the other suspects. The Delhi High Court overturned the conviction following an appeal, concluding that the prosecution’s entire case was irrationally implausible and unbelievable. It would be dangerous to rely exclusively on the complainant’s testimony to obtain a conviction, as one impartial witness turned hostile.
Conclusion
Section 390 of the Indian Criminal Code of 1860 specifies that robbery must always involve either theft or extortion. The most serious kind of theft or extortion is robbery. Hence, the requirements of theft as stated in Section 378 and extortion as mentioned in Section 383 must be met transitively in order for it to be considered theft amounting to robbery or extortion amounting to robbery. Yet there must be an element of immediate threat, harm, or death for extortion to become robbery or stealing to become robbery. Robbery must be separated from dacoity, which needs a minimum of five participants, though. Since the four offenses are frequently confused by laypeople but are distinct in the legal world, it is crucial to understand the differences between them.
Aishwarya Says:
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to secondinnings.hr@gmail.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening