SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES

TOPIC – ROBBERY

SUBMITTED TO : SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. Parul Pareek DIVYANSHA GOYAL
(ASSISTANT PROFESSOR) 170038
SLS B.A.LL.B 2ND year
ROBBERY
Robbery is defined by the Black’s Law Dictionary as the felonious act
of taking the personal property in the possession of another from his
person or immediate presence against his will accomplished using
force and fear, with an intention of permanently depriving the true
owner of the thing in question.

According to Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 “in all

robbery there is either theft or extortion.”
 
WHEN THEFT IS ROBBERY
Theft becomes robbery when the following conditions are satisfied :-

•When the offender voluntarily causes or attempts to cause:

• Death, wrongful restraint or hurt or
• Fear of instant death, instant wrongful restraint or instant hurt.

•And the above act(s) is done

• While committing the theft
•  To commit the theft
• While carrying away the property obtained by theft or
• While attempting to carry away property obtained by theft.
WHEN EXTORTION IS ROBBERY
Extortion becomes robbery when the following conditions are satisfied:-
1. When a person commits extortion by putting another in the fear of instant death,
wrongful restraint or hurt
2. Then the offender induces the person under such fear to deliver the property at
that very instant; then and there.
3. The offender is in the near presence of such a person put in fear at the time of
extortion.
ILLUSTRATION WHEN THEFT IS ROBBERY :
 A holds Z down and fraudulently takes Z’s money and jewels
from Z’s clothes without Z’s consent. Here A has committed
theft, and by committing of that theft, has voluntarily caused
wrongful restraint to Z. A has therefore committed rob­bery.

ILLUSTRATION WHEN EXTORTION IS ROBBERY :

A meets Z and Z’s child on the high road. A takes the child and
threatens to fling it down a precipice unless Z delivers his purse. Z, in
consequence, delivers his purse. Here A has extorted the purse from Z,
by causing Z to be in fear of instant hurt to the child who is present. A
has therefore robbed Z.
PUNISHMENT FOR ROBBERY
The punishment for robbery is given under Section 392 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. Any person who commits robbery shall be punished with
rigorous imprisonment which may be extended up to ten years and shall
also be liable to pay a fine.

If the robbery is committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise,

then the period of imprisonment may be extended up to 14 years.

 Section 393 the punishment for an attempt to commit robbery is

enshrined. According to this section, anyone who attempts to commit
robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for up to seven years
and also be liable for a fine.
 HUSHRUT SHEIKH’S CASE
(1866)6 WR (Cr)85
FACTS: C and D were stealing mangoes from tree and
were surprised by B. C knocked down B and B became
senseless.
HELD : It was held to be a case of Robbery.
EDWARD’S CASE 1843
FACTS : A person, while cutting a string tied to a
basket accidentally cut the wrist of the owner who
tried to seize it.
HELD : He was held guilty of only theft not robbery.
SHIKANDAR V. STATE 1984
FACTS: The accused attacked his victim by knife many times
and succeeded in acquiring the ear rings and key from her
salwar.
HELD: He was held guilty of robbery.
HARISCHANDRA V. STATE OF U.P
AIR 1976 SC 1430
FACTS: Ramavtar snatched the watch of Avinash
kumar. Harishchandra in order to stop him slapped him
and his other companion hit him with a stick .
HELD : The offence was held to covered under
Robbery.
MUBARAKULLA V. STATE OF KARNATAKA
2010
FACTS : Kavya returning towards her house' in 'auto
rickshaw, petitioner had caused obstruction to the movement
of her auto rickshaw. Accused assaulted injured his father with
a knife and cause injuries to them .
HELD: Accused was convicted for the offence of Robbery.
MADHU V. STATE OF KERALA,
AIR 2012 SC 664
FACTS : Madhu Kalikutty Panicker and Sibi Bhaskaran robbed
Padmini Devi alias Omana of her gold ornaments and thereafter
having murdered her on 8.5.1998 at her residence, i.e., Kalathil
House situated in Ward No.IV of Veliyanad Village.
HELD : Madhu Kalikutty was charged along with Sibi
Bhaskaran for offences of Robbery.
SANWANT KHAN AND KALOO KHAN V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
AIR 1956 SC 54

FACTS: Mahant Ganeshdas who was a wealthy person used to live

in a temple, it was discovered that both of them were lying dead in
the temple. Death took place on account of injuries caused to them
by means of an axe. The house had also been ransacked and boxes
and almirahs opened.
HELD :Accused was charged for the offence of Robbery with
Murder.
 R v Sharp [1987] Q.B. 853
FACTS : Sharp participated in a robbery of a post office, in
which the leader of the gang shot and killed a victim using a
sawn-off shotgun.
HELD : The court held that the defence of duress is not
available to an individual who voluntarily joins a criminal
gang or organization, particularly if he knew that he might be
pressured to commit an offence
R v Dawson [1976] Crim LR 692.
FACTS : The defendant had nudged the victim causing him to
lose his balance so that his wallet could be more easily taken.
HELD : His appeal against a conviction for robbery was
refused.
R v Clouden [1987] Crim LR 56
FACTS : The defendant had pulled on the victim’s handbag to
snatch it from her hands
HELD : The Court of Appeal held that whilst a snatching of
property without resistance from the owner, such as by a
pickpocket, should not amount to robbery.