Anushka Sharma-
Published On: November 11, 2021 at 12:13 IST
Delhi High Court ruled that the absence of a weapon is no reason to dismiss Proceedings under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code, which prohibits committing Robbery or Dacoity with the intent to cause Death or serious bodily harm to another person.
According to Justice Subramonium Prasad, the effect of the Weapon’s non-recovery will be evident only during the Trial, and therefore cannot be used as a basis for not filing charges under Section 397 IPC.
The State had filed a Revision Petition challenging an Order by the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Court, holding that the Offence under Section 397 IPC had not been made out against the Accused and that the matter should be sent to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the framing of a charge under Section 392 IPC.
The Accused had confessed to having committed an Act in which he and others threatened several individuals with a firearm and demanded that they hand over all of their things.
The District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, held that since the pistol was only brandished, and was not used, the Offence under Section 397 IPC was not made out against the Accused.
Therefore, the question for High Court’s consideration was “Whether when an act of Robbery is committed by showing a revolver/pistol then does an Offence under 397 IPC is made out or not?“
The Court reaffirmed that the phrase ‘Use’ would encompass brandishing the weapon against another person in Order to overwhelm him or frighten his Victim within the meaning of Section 397 of the IPC, citing a Supreme Court decision.
Also Read: Difference between Theft, Extortion, Robbery and Dacoity under Indian Penal Code, 1860
Maharashtra Court acquits 4 person alleged of Armed Dacoity