Important Blogs

Article 2 of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act

Section 390 and 391 of Indian Panel Code (Robbery and Dacoity)

What is Robbery? What is Robbery vs Theft? What is Dacoity? What is the difference between Dacoity and Robbery? 

This is Important  part of the Indian Panel Code which is also important from the Judicial point of the view that is Robbery defined in chapter  17 of Offences against Property so this is a very important chapter as related to this  many questions have been asked in Judiciary,

Robbery, theft, and even extortion are very similar and even used many times in everyday use. However, the terms are different in the legal sense and within the purview of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and are clearly defined as separate offenses. The demarcation between these two is given under Section 390 of the Penal Code. But before analyzing that section, first the theft and extortion need to be understood separately.

Robbery defined  in section 390 of Indian Panel Code, now what is Robbery like when you will read in bare Act about  Robbery, there Robbery is either Extortion or Theft so why are we making different section for it so robbery.  Robbery is like Theft accompanied by Wrongful Restraint, Death or Hurt or  Instant death, instant hurt or instant Wrongful restraint now this is related to theft now  we will repeat the same thing with Extortion.

Robbery is extortion accompanied with Instant  death, instant hurt or instant wrongful restraint so even attempt to commit these things is  subjected to Robbery so Robbery is not just Theft or Extortion but accompanied with Wrongful  restraint, hurt or death so this was basic difference between Robbery, theft, and extortion,  now how is theft and Extortion different Extortion there is fear to deliver something

whereas  in Theft without consent, we take any moveable property or money so this is basically the difference  in extortion and Theft in theft we don't put him in fear now we will discuss Illustrations  from Bare Act as many questions have been asked from them in Judiciary so we should  study in Illustration

Illustration 1

Theft has been told Theft accompanied with wrongful restraint  like A confines Z and takes his money and jewels so here theft became Robbery,

Illustration 2

Extortion accompanied by instant fear or hurt, A meets Z on high roads, shows his pistol to get his purse here A has subjected Z to hurt,

here Extortion is accompanied with  fear of instant hurt, so this constitutes to Robbery now we have discussed Robbery now  we will come to our second part which is the difference between Robbery and Theft so now What is Theft? Theft has been defined in section 378 and Robbery has been defined in section 390

Now  Theft is part of Robbery whereas Robbery is different from Theft, Robbery is when Theft  is accompanied with as I told you before, Wrongful Restraint, hurt or death, or Attempt even Attempt  to commit Robbery is punishable under the Code so now we will come to our third part  which is Dacoity,

Dacoity has been defined in section 391 of the Indian Panel Code like Theft was part  of Robbery like that Robbery is the initial part of Dacoity, Dacoity is just Robbery committed  by 5 or more than 5 with the same intention or even Attempt or Aid to commit Robbery by  5 or more person will come under Dacoity so this was Dacoity, Dacoity means Robbery committed  by 5 or more than 5 persons so we covered Dacoity.

What is the difference between Dacoity and Robbery?

Dacoity has been defined in section  391 of the Indian Panel Code whereas Robbery has been defined in section 390 of Indian Panel Code now how these both are  different, Robbery is part of Dacoity for Dacoity Robbery should have been committed  or even attempt to commit Robbery by five or more than 5 persons, so this is the difference  between Robbery and Dacoity.

Case law

In the case of Pyare Lal Bhargava vs  State of Rajasthan, a government employee took a file from the government office and presented it to a certain Mr. A and brought it back two days later. It was considered that it was not necessary to permanently snatch property, even temporary movement with dishonest or malicious intent is sufficient and would amount to theft.