Facts of the Case
- Four individuals acted together and entered a bank.
- They were armed with deadly weapons (such as guns, knives, iron rods, etc.).
- They used force/intimidation against bank staff/customers.
- They removed cash and valuables from the bank without consent.
- They escaped with the stolen property.
- Police arrested them and charges were filed.
Issues in the Case
- Whether the act committed amounts to “robbery” or “dacoity” under the Indian Penal Code (IPC)?
- Whether use of deadly weapons enhances the severity of punishment?
- Whether the presence of four accused is sufficient or five persons are required to constitute dacoity?
- Whether they can be charged with other offences such as criminal conspiracy, unlawful assembly, or attempt to murder?
Legal Principles Involved
A. Robbery (Sections 390 & 392 IPC)
- Theft becomes robbery when the offender, for committing theft, uses:
- Violence,
- Fear of instant death,
- Hurt or wrongful restraint.
Since the accused used deadly weapons and intimidation, the act clearly constitutes robbery.
B. Dacoity (Section 391 & 395 IPC)
- When five or more persons commit or attempt to commit robbery, it becomes dacoity.
Here, the number of offenders is only four; therefore it does not amount to dacoity.
C. Robbery Armed with Deadly Weapons (Section 397 IPC)
- If, during robbery, the offender uses a deadly weapon, causes grievous hurt, or attempts to cause death,
→ Minimum punishment is 7 years.
Since the accused were carrying deadly weapons, Section 397 IPC applies.
D. Common Intention (Section 34 IPC)
- Acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention make each person liable as if they committed the act individually.
All four acted together → Section 34 IPC applies.
E. Unlawful Assembly (Section 141 IPC) – Optional Charge
- Though dacoity needs 5 persons, an unlawful assembly can exist with 5 or more persons, but here only four persons are involved → this section does not apply unless more accomplices existed.
F. Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120-B IPC)
- If they had pre-planned the robbery, criminal conspiracy can also be charged.
Possible Judgement
Likely Finding of the Court:
- Since the offenders are only four, they are not guilty of dacoity under Section 395 IPC.
- They are, however, guilty of robbery, and because they used deadly weapons, the offence attracts enhanced punishment under Section 397 IPC.
- They will also be punished under Section 34 IPC for common intention, and possibly under Section 120B IPC for conspiracy.
Probable Court Conclusion:
- Guilty of Robbery (Sections 390/392 IPC).
- Guilty of Robbery with Deadly Weapons (Section 397 IPC).
- Liable under Section 34 IPC (common intention).
Possible Punishment:
- Minimum 7 years rigorous imprisonment, extendable to life imprisonment, plus fine.
Final Judicial Outcome:
The offenders committed the crime of robbery with deadly weapons, punishable under Sections 392 + 397 read with 34 IPC, not dacoity (because minimum 5 persons are required).
About lawgnan
To strengthen your understanding of criminal law concepts like robbery, dacoity, use of deadly weapons, common intention, and aggravated offences under the IPC, visit Lawgana.in. The platform provides clear, exam-oriented explanations, structured case analyses, and simplified notes ideal for law students, judiciary aspirants, and legal researchers. Explore detailed interpretations of Sections 390, 392, 397, and 34 IPC along with practical illustrations to enhance conceptual clarity. Whether preparing for college exams or competitive law tests, Lawgana.in offers reliable, updated, and easy-to-learn legal content. Elevate your legal preparation—visit Lawgana.in today.
