Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

KL,J & SKS,J Crl.A. Nos.774 of 2016 & batch

2. Criminal Appeal Nos.774, 787, 858, 1195 and 940 of 2016 and 603 of 2022 are filed by accused Nos.5, 2, 3, 6, 4, 10 and 7, respectively, challenging the judgment dated 25.07.2016 passed by the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar in S.C. No.484 of 2015 (arising out of Crime No.100 of 2009 of Lalaguda Police Station), whereby and whereunder they were convicted for the offences under Sections - 364A, 395 and 343 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section - 364A of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under Section - 395 of IPC. They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two (02) years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence under Section - 343 of IPC.

ii) Now coming to Section - 395 of IPC, it is relevant to note that Section - 391 of IPC deals with dacoity and it says that when five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or . (2023) 6 SCC 76 KL,J & SKS,J Crl.A. Nos.774 of 2016 & batch where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt, amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit "dacoity".

d) The explanation thereto says that 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.

e) Section - 395 of IPC deals with punishment for dacoity, and it says that whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

a) In Lachhman Ram v. State of Orissa 4, on examination of the facts therein, the Apex Court held all the accused persons committed dacoity in the houses of the complainant one after the other and looted and took away various kinds of property in the nature of watches, ornaments, etc. All the accused were held guilty under Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code.

b) In Ganesan v. State, rep.by Station House Officer5, while discussing the essential element of Section - 391 of IPC, the Apex Court observed that the offence under Section 391 of IPC punishable under Section 395 IPC cannot be declared to not have been made out just because some of the accused fled and less than five individuals turned up to be punished in the trial. It is necessary to take into account that five or more people participated in and committed the robbery, not whether those people were put on trial. When five or more people jointly commit the robbery offence or attempt to commit . (1985) 2 SCC 533 . LiveLaw 2021 SC 614 KL,J & SKS,J Crl.A. Nos.774 of 2016 & batch the robbery, the case is brought under Section 391 of IPC and is considered to be a "dacoity," depending on the evidence.