RELEVANT SECTIONS DEALING WITH OFFENCE TO ATTEMPT

S. 393 Attempt to commit robbery: -

“Whoever attempts to commit robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a
term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
 It is a cognizable offense.
 It is non-bailable.
 It is not a compoundable offense.
 It tried under Magistrate of first class
Section 393 is a section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that specifically deals with attempted
robbery. In other words, the act of attempting to commit robbery is considered a crime even if
the theft is not actually committed. In order to fully understand this section, it is necessary to
first understand its definition and legal framework.
To be considered a crime under this section, certain factors must be present in order for it to
be considered a crime. These factors include a clear intention to commit robbery as well as a
significant step towards committing the crime. In this article, we will explore these factors
and provide you with a complete understanding of what constitutes a legal threshold for a
crime under this Section.
1. Case law- shahaji ramanna nair vs. state of Maharashtra
“In the result after trial accused was acquitted of the charges under Section 394 of IPC.
However, he was convicted for the offense punishable under Section 393 and Section 398
IPC separately and was also sentenced on both the counts separately.”1
Impact on sentencing
An attempted robbery charge doesn’t stop with the legal penalties. In this section, you’ll learn
how an attempted robbery charge affects sentencing, parole, rehabilitation, alternative
resolutions, and more. You’ll also learn about the wider social consequences of being
charged under section 393 IPC.

1
“Shahaji Ramanna Nair Vs State of Maharashtra, 2007CRILJ4653, 2007
S. 398 – Attempt to commit robbery or dacoity when armed with a deadly
weapon
“If, at the time of attempting to commit robbery or dacoity, the offender is armed with any
deadly weapon, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be
less than seven years.”2

S. 399 - Making preparation to commit dacoity

“Whoever makes any preparation for committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
 Section 398 applies to attempted dacoity; it does not apply to robbery. A person is
considered to be “an armed person” when he carries a weapon and carries it with the
intention of using it if the need arises. It is sufficient for the offender to carry a
dangerous weapon in a way that a person believes it can be used against him at any
time. The offender will be punished under section 398.
 It is cognizable offence.
 It is non bailable offence.
 It tried under court of session.
Case law- Ashfaq v. State (Govt. of the NCT of Delhi (2004)3
When interpreting section 397 IPC, the Supreme Court took note of the wording of section
398 IPC, which states that the offender is armed with “any deadly weapon.” The Supreme
Court held that a person who brandishes and displays a deadly weapon in a manner that
induces fear and terror in the victim so that the victim does not resist for fear of being killed.
 Section 399 penalizes the mere act of getting ready for dacoity. Dacoity is a crime
that is committed at the stage of getting ready for it. Getting ready for it means that a
plan for dacoity has already been made. Getting ready for a dacoity is in accordance
with such a plan. Getting ready for the crime of dacoity involves devising, planning
or arranging for the crime to be committed.

2
Tatheer Fatima, “DACOITY UNDER IPC,” <
https://www.indianbarassociation.org/dacoity-under-ipc/#:~:text=Section%20398.,Section%20399.>
3
“Ashfaq Vs State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi), AIR 2004 SUPREME COURT 1253
 Ram Kishore vs state, 2021.
“The Allahabad High Court held that the prosecution must prove that further steps were
taken during the preparation for committing dacoity in order to establish the offence
under Section 399 of the IPC.”4

In another case, in Asgar v. state of Rajasthan (2003) it was held that in order to prove an
offence under section 399 IPC, it is necessary not only to prove the act of preparation but also to
prove whether the act for which the preparation was taking place was a dacoit or robbery to be
carried out by five or more persons.

4
Richa Joshi ‘Section 395 IPC : Dacoity’ (2022) <
https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-395-ipc-dacoity/#Preparing_to_commit_dacoity_Section_399_IPC. >