Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.30 seconds)

Rakesh vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 20 July, 2010

10. Sections 392 and 393, IPC prescribe punishment in case of robbery and attempted robbery respectively. Under Section 392 IPC an accused can be punished with upto 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and fine and upto 14 years of rigorous imprisonment when robbery is committed on highway between sunset and sunrise. The punishment prescribed is stringent. For a case to fall under Section 392 IPC in case of theft amounting to robbery, actual theft as defined in Section 378 IPC should be committed. For Section 392 IPC to apply, the prosecution has to establish that during the course of commission of the offence of theft the offender had caused or had intended to cause threat of death or hurt or to wrongful restrain (Malkhan Singh vs State of Haryana 1994 SCC (Crl) 1422). Section 393 IPC applies when an accused attempts to commit robbery but the same is not actually committed. Under Section 393 IPC, the maximum punishment prescribed is 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine. Again, the punishment prescribed is stringent. However, no minimum punishment has been prescribed in Sections 392 and 393 IPC.
Delhi High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - S Khanna - Full Document
1