Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

19. It is perfectly true that the prosecution must establish, in a case of this kind, that the accused had conceived design for committing dacoity; but it is equally true that the intention of an individual or a number of individuals who have conspired together is seldom known to others, and can only be established by proof of circumstances from which the intention can be inferred. Witnesses cannot give direct evidence as to the intention of the accused; and, if the legitimate inference from the circumstances which are established is that the intention of the accused was to commit dacoity, it is for them to prove that their intention was different. Illustration (a) of Section 106 of the Evidence Act makes this quite clear. Reliance may be placed in this connection upon Jain Lal v. Emperor, AIR 1943 Pat 82, a case to which I will again have to make reference.

20-22. Let us consider the circumstances which appear against the respondents in this case, (His Lordship considered these circumstances).

23. In my opinion, the circumstances which I have mentioned above lead, in the absence of a probable explanation from the respondents, inevitably to the conclusion that the respondents had formed a design for committing dacoity. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge appears to have thought that it was necessary for the prosecution to prove that the respondents' intention was to commit dacoity in the house of Govind Mandal of village Gopalpur. In my view, that was not at all necessary. The Deputy Superintendent has mentioned what he heard from his spy merely to explain why he formed a raiding party and went to Pir Asthan.

24. As I have already held that it has been established that the respondents and their companions had conceived the design or, in other words, had planned to commit a dacoity, the question which has to be considered is what offence or offences the respondents have been proved to have committed. Dacoity is perhaps the only offence which the legislature has made punishable at four stages. When five or more persons assemble for the purpose of committing a dacoity, each of them is punishable under Section 402 of the Penal Code merely on the ground of joining the assembly. Another stage is that of preparation, and, it any one makes preparation to commit a dacoity, he is punishable under Section 399. The definition of 'dacoity' in Section 391 of the Penal Code shows that the other two stages, namely, the stage of attempting to commit, and the stage of actual commission of, robbery, have been treated alike, and come within the definition.