Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. The only question left for consideration is whether offence under S.397 IPC is made out or not. This section reads as under:

―397. Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt.--If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any per-son, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.‖

13. A bare reading of this section goes to show that an act would fall within the mischief of this section if at the time of committing robbery or dacoity the offender-

        (a)      Uses any deadly weapon; or
        (b)      Causes grievous hurt to any person; and





         (c)      Attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person.

14. In the instant case, it is not the case of prosecution that at the time of committing robbery any of the accused used any deadly weapon. Therefore, it is to be seen whether the accused caused grievous hurt to the complainant or her mother in law - Smt. Shanti Devi or attempted to cause the same.

19. Grievous hurt is defined in S.320 IPC and reads as under:

―320. Grievous hurt.--The following kinds of hurt only are desig­nated as ―grievous‖:--

(First) -- Emasculation.

(Secondly) --Permanent privation of the sight of either eye. (Thirdly) -- Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear, (Fourthly) --Privation of any member or joint.

(Fifthly) -- Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.

(Sixthly) -- Permanent disfiguration of the head or face. (Seventhly) --Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth. (Eighthly) --Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

20. As per Clause "Seventhly" of this Section, fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth comes with the category of „grievous hurt‟. That being so, the prosecution has succeeded in proving that at the time of committing robbery, grievous hurt was caused on the person of the complainant as well as her mother in law by both the accused persons and therefore they were rightly convicted for offence under S. 397/394 IPC.