Theft, Robbery and Dacoity under IPC

The offences of Theft, Robbery and Dacoity are offences against the property. Moveable and immovable property are the two basic categories into which it is separated. Any violation committed to any property, whether it is mobile or immovable, is subject to punishment under the Indian Penal Code [IPC] or the laws of crimes. Sections 378 through 460 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, give a thorough description of these offences and the corresponding punishments. The property right was acknowledged as a fundamental right even under Article 19(f) of the Constitution of India at the time of its adoption; however, it was subsequently designated a legal right under Article 300-A. These laws were made to protect this invaluable human right.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. Theft Under IPC
2. Essentials of Theft Under IPC
3. Sections Under IPC on Aggravated Forms of Theft
4. Punishment for Theft
5. Case Law on Theft
6. Robbery Under IPC
7. Essentials of Robbery
8. When Theft is Robbery
9. When Extortion is Robbery
10. Punishments of Robbery Under IPC
11. Case Laws on Robbery
12. Dacoity Under IPC
13. Essentials of Dacoity
14. Types of Dacoity
15. Case laws on Dacoity
16. Difference Between Robbery and Dacoity
17. Conclusion

Theft Under IPC

Theft is defined under Section 378 of the IPC, 1860. The deliberate moving of any movable object to dishonestly remove it from someone's possession without that person's agreement is known as theft.

Illustration- A lures Z's dog to follow by placing a dog treat in his pocket. In this case, if A's dishonest goal is to remove the dog from Z's custody without getting Z's permission. Since Z's dog started to follow A, A has been stealing.

In the case of, K.N. Mehra v. State of Rajasthan it was held that The primary components of stealing are the absence of the victim's consent at the time of moving and the existence of dishonest intent at that time.

Essentials of Theft Under IPC

Dishonest Intentions

When someone takes property intending to cause another person to suffer unlawful loss or gain either of these scenarios constitutes dishonest intention. The act of stealing is incomplete without this intention, which is referred to as animus furandi. Consequently, it was determined that when a respectable person merely pinches the cycle of another person to replace his own, which was absent at the moment, no stealing takes place.

Movable Property

Section Explanation addresses the need for the property to be mobile in order for it to be susceptible to theft. Since it is not movable property in the first place, anything that is affixed to the earth cannot be stolen. But, anything that is cut off from the soil instantly becomes movable property, and the act of cutting it off is equivalent to theft.

Taking out of Someone’s Possession

For theft, it makes no difference if the person whose possession of the item is taken is not the genuine owner or if their right to it is only apparent. The crucial component of the offence is possession, not ownership. A theft is a theft, end of story. Thus, taking something from a thief is considered stealing.

As with finding misplaced items, taking decorations from a deceased person's body is not theft but rather criminal misappropriation since it does not qualify as taking property from that person. When an owner removes something that the court has mandated to be connected to, it is considered theft.

Without Consent

Goods that have been stolen must be removed without the owner's express or implicit consent. A permission that is fraudulently obtained and leads to a false portrayal of the facts is void. Conversely, when someone visits a well-liked friend's library, they take out a book without the friend's consent and return it at a later time. It won't be deemed theft because the book was taken with the other party's tacit consent and no ill intent.

Movement of Property

Such property should not be moved while still in the owner's custody. Such property doesn't need to be physically carried taken. A person is considered to have committed theft if he puts bait in his pocket, luring the dog to approach him to steal the dog from its owner. Additionally, theft will happen if someone utilizes the internet to hide any movable objects from another person in their home where they might be hidden from view. This type of property movement doesn't even have to be continuous. It is not always necessary for the person stealing the property to gain anything from it.

Sections Under IPC on Aggravated Forms of Theft

Section 380-

Theft in any structure, tent, or boat used for residential purposes or to hold goods

Section 381-

Theft of goods belonging to a master by a clerk or servant

Section 382-

Theft that involves planning to kill someone, harming, restraining, or instilling fear of death in someone to carry out the theft, making an escape thereafter, or keeping the item that was stolen in the process

Punishment for Theft

Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with the Punishment for Theft. According to this, Any individual found guilty of stealing faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison of any kind, a fine, or both.

Case Law on Theft

Pyare Lai v. State

In this case, it was held that If he removed any movable goods from someone else's possession intending to return it later, that would qualify as theft. However, according to English law, property must be stolen to permanently deprive someone else. The appellant in the aforementioned instance worked as a superintendent for the government.

K N Mehra v. State of Rajasthan

The components of stealing were fully outlined in the case of "K N Mehra v. State of Rajasthan" by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Two air wing cadets (one a trainee navigator and the other expelled for poor behaviour) deceitfully took an Air India aircraft (other than the one assigned) to Pakistan instead of Dakota, as required by the training program, without even obtaining authorisation from the relevant authorities. They landed in Pakistan and discovered themselves in the middle of nowhere, so they tried to call the Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan. They were meant to return to Delhi, but on the way, they were stopped at Jodhpur and arrested for stealing. As a consequence, the court found the accused guilty of stealing and sentenced them to jail.

Robbery Under IPC

Aggregated forms of theft and extortion or both are Robbery. Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with Robbery. According to Section 390 of IPC, In the following situations, theft is the same as robbery. When trying to steal something or when intending to steal anything To that aim, the offender willfully causes or seeks to inflict harm, death, wrongful restraint, or fear of any of these to someone.

Robbery is an essential crime because there is an imminent threat of violence or terror. The language used to accomplish that purpose implies that carrying out the theft would require stealing, taking stolen goods, or inflicting pain, death, or unlawful restraint. Violence can therefore be committed before, during, or after stealing, but it must be committed for one of the purposes mentioned above.

Illustration- Without getting Z's permission, A restrains Z and steals money and jewellery from Z's clothing. Here, A has stolen something, and in the process of doing so, he has willfully put Z under unjustified restraint. A has consequently committed robbery.

Essentials of Robbery

Causing Hurt, Fear, Death and Wrongful Restraint

When stealing is categorized as robbery or when extortion is categorized as robbery, the people involved may suffer from specific consequences including death, injury, wrongful restraint, or fear.

Theft becomes Robbery

When stealing, carrying away the stolen property, or attempting to do so, the offender intentionally causes or attempts to cause death, wrongful restraint, or hurt, or instils fear of immediate death, immediate wrongful restraint, or immediate hurt to any person. This is when theft is considered robbery.

Extortion becomes Robbery

When an individual causes fear in another person and gains something valuable by instilling fear of death or immediate wrongful restraint in that person or another, it is considered robbery. The frightened person is then immediately forced to hand over the pilfered item.

Possessing Stolen Property

Sections 410 through 414 of the Indian Penal Code address the concept of stolen property. Section 410 defines stolen property as the transfer of one's property to another person by theft, extortion, robbery, criminal misappropriation, or criminal breach of trust. It comprises a wide range of property sorts that can be illegally seized.

These circumstances of property obtained unlawfully are referred to as stolen properties. Property transferred through any of the previously described channels is considered stolen property per Section 410. These tactics include criminal misappropriation, robbery, theft, extortion, and criminal breach of trust. According to Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, anyone found to be dishonestly in possession of or holding onto stolen goods faces a minimum sentence of three years in jail, a fine, or both.

When Theft is Robbery

The Indian Penal Code, of 1860, defines theft as dishonestly taking someone else's property without that person's consent and relocating it. This definition is found in Section 378.

According to the Indian Penal Code, theft is classified as robbery if the perpetrator knowingly causes or attempts to inflict death, harm, or unlawful restraint during the conduct of the crime, or if the offender instils fear of immediate death, harm, or wrongful restraint in any person. These can be done to aid in the theft or make a getaway with the stolen goods, and they can take place before, during, or following the theft.

When Extortion is Robbery

The Indian Penal Code, of 1860 defines extortion in Section 383. According to this section, extortion is defined as the deliberate infliction of fear of harm on another person to deceitfully coerce them into delivering valuable property or signing anything that could be used as valuable security.

When an offender extorts someone while physically present in the person's presence, it is considered robbery under the Indian Penal Code. The individual being extorted or another person is made to fear imminent death, immediate harm, or immediate wrongful restraint by the perpetrator. The perpetrator forces the victim of extortion to give over the desired object or property right then and there by creating this dread.

Robbery in both situations refers to the unauthorised taking of property through theft or extortion combined with coercion, fear, or force. Robbery is a more serious criminal offence with possibly worse punishments than theft or extortion because it involves violence, hurt, or improper constraint.

Punishments of Robbery Under IPC

provision 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 specifies the penalty for robbery. According to this provision, anyone convicted of robbery faces a maximum ten-year jail sentence and the potential for fines. Moreover, the sentence may be enhanced to 14 years in jail if the robbery occurs on a highway. According to Section 393, there is a seven-year maximum sentence for attempted robbery and a possible fine.

Case Laws on Robbery

In the case of, State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel

In this case, The question of whether theft becomes robbery was one of the primary points of discussion here. Further evidence of how Indian courts view robbery as a more serious crime is shown by the court's ruling that every element of theft as defined by Section 378 must be proven to build a case of robbery.

Dacoity Under IPC

When five or more people use violence or the threat of violence to take items from individuals or groups, it is referred to as an armed robbery or group robbery, and when two or more people work together to conduct a robbery, it is known as dacoity, as per Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code.

Under the IPC, dacoity is a serious crime with harsh penalties. The sentence can be life in prison or even the death penalty if the dacoity results in the victim suffering a significant injury or passing away. In other situations, the penalty can be a fine, ten years in jail, or both.

Robbery is not as serious a crime as dacoity because it involves fewer people and the use of weapons. Usually armed with a weapon, dacoits perform coordinated acts of dacoity to frighten and harass their victims.

Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code stipulates that anyone found guilty of dacoity faces a life sentence or a hard term of up to ten years in jail, in addition to a fine.

Essentials of Dacoity

To determine the specificity of an offence, a few essential components must be present. To distinguish one offence from another, certain components are required. The primary components of the offence of dacoity are as follows:

• Robbery had been perpetrated or attempted by the accused.

• Robbers must number five or more when they commit or attempt to commit robbery. This also applies to the helper who is in attendance.

• Each of these people ought to act in concert.

Types of Dacoity

Section 396- Dacoity With Murder

Joint culpability for all those who commit dacoity and murder together is established by Section 396. For example, if one dacoit murders alongside a dacoity in a group of dacoits. The act will hold everyone equally responsible. This clause has a maximum sentence of ten years in hard prison, life in prison, or death, along with a fine.

In the case of, Shyam Behari v. State of Uttar Pradesh

In this case, it was held that The question of whether one accused person can be found guilty of both murder and dacoity depends on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, namely whether or not the dacoity act could be considered ongoing at the time of the murder.

Section 397- Dacoity to Cause Grievous Hurt or Death

For robbery and dacoity, Section 397 stipulates a minimum penalty of seven years if dangerous weapons are used or if the victim suffers serious injury. It eliminates any possibility of constructive culpability and assumes an individual act.

Section 398- Dacoity with Deadly Weapon

Instances of attempted dacoity are covered by Section 398. It doesn't apply to situations where there has been robbery. When someone carries a weapon and has it with them, expecting to use it when necessary, they are said to be "armed with a weapon." It is sufficient if the criminal carries a lethal weapon in a way that gives the impression that it could be used against him at any time. There will be penalties for Section 398.

Section 399- Preparation to Commit Dacoity

Section 399 penalizes the act of just planning to commit dacoity. Dacoity is a crime that has repercussions even during the planning phase. The preparation shows that a scheme to commit dacoity has been established. The planning is done under this plan. Creating, organizing, or setting up the commission of the dacoity offence is a type of preparation.

Section 400- Punishment for being a member of a Dacoity Group

Individuals who are part of a group of people who have made dacoity their regular business are subject to punishment under Section 400. The essence of the offence is its relationship with the regular pursuit of dacoity. An association is a pairing for a shared goal.

In the case of, State v. Hetep Boro

In this case, According to the Gauhati High Court, proving the accused's involvement in a particular dacoity is not necessary to prove guilt under Section 400 of the Indian Penal Code. Rather, under Section 400, guilt may still be shown using evidence that was rejected to prove guilt under Section 395.

Case laws on Dacoity

In the case of, Raju Sampath Darode v. The State of Maharashtra

In this case, The accused has been given the death penalty by the Bombay High Court for both killing his bosses and engaging in dacoity. By deceiving their on-duty watchman on December 2, 2007, the accused gained entry to the home of his employers, Ramesh and Chitra. In the living room, there was a puddle of blood where Ramesh was discovered. The defendant stabbed him in the forehead and heart. He sealed his mouth with tape. His wife Chitra was sitting in a chair, her neck chopped, and she was beaten with telephone wire. Jewellery, foreign currency, and nine lakhs in pilfered cash were also found in the house.

Difference Between Robbery and Dacoity

Conclusion

The offences of Theft, Robbery and Dacoity as mentioned in this article are offences against property. This crimes are termed as serious crimes under the Indian Penal Code 1860. Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with offences of theft where the offender takes away a movable property without the consent of the owner. Section 390 of the IPC deals with the offence of Robbery. In an offence of Robbery, the offender steals property by inflicting harm, or injury to the owner of the property. Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code deals with Dacoity. When five or more people use violence or the threat of violence to take items from individuals or groups, it is referred to as an armed robbery or group robbery. Dacoity is the term for when two or more persons work together to commit a robbery.