Robbery and Suicide

Section 390 of Indian Penal code

390. Robbery- In all robbery there is either theft or extortion.
When theft is robbery.Theft is robbery if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in
committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by
the theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person
death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant
wrongful restraint.
When extortion is robbery.Extortion is robbery if the offender, at the time of
committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear, and commits the
extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful
restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person
so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
Explanation.The offender is said to be present if he is sufficiently near to put the other
person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint1.
Theft, extortion and robbery
Theft or extortion when caused with violences causing death or fear of death, hurt or
wrongful restraint is robbery. When there is no theft, as a natural corollary, there cannot be
robbery. Robbery is only an aggravated form of theft or extortion. Aggravation is in the use of
violence causing death and fear to death, hurt or restrain. Violence is in the course of theft
and not subsequently. Also, it is not necessary that violence should actually be committed,
even attempt to commit it is enough.2
Section 392 Indian Penal code
392. Punishment for robbery.Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and,
if the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment
may be extended to fourteen years.
Section 393
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.
Case Laws
1 Indian Penal Code 1860
2 K.D. Kaur

Rabindra Chaurasia vs State Of Jharkhand3

In that case the victim after completing his work at Ranchi in order to go to Dhanbad he
boarded on a rickshaw and was going towards Khadgaraha Bus Stand to catch the bus. When
he reached near St. John's High School, his rickshaw was stopped by two young people aged
about 20-21 years and after stopping the rickshaw they started looting his briefcase and the
airbag. When he protest Rabindra took out dragger and assaulted him on his stomach. Due to
the hullah the people and suddenly a police patrolling jeep reached. Seeing them the starting
running towards Sardar hospital they police chased they and caught one accused (Rabindra)
other accused run away. He was charged under section 393 and 397 of IPC.
Mohd Kumar Abdul Ansari vs. State Of Maharashtra4
In that case the appellant was charged under section 450 read with section 34 and 393,394
read with section 398 of IPC. The complaint was a doctor, suddenly the doorbell rang. The
complainant opened the door. At that time the appellant and another unknown person were
standing at the door. They enquired whether he was doctor. Dr. Bhakre replied affirmatively.
They told him that one lady patient was to be examined, hence, Dr. Bhakre turned to pick up
pen. Immediately one of the persons assaulted him with chopper. Dr. Bhakre tried to save
himself, in the process he got injured on his left hand. Dr. Bhakre caught hold of that persons
neck with his right hand; meanwhile, the wanted accused gave a blow with weapon in his
hand. To escape the said blow, Dr. Bhakre used the appellant as shield; as a result the accused
received the said blow. The other person fled away from the spot and the appellant fell down
due to injuries. The appellant pleaded not guilty of to the said charge and claimed to be tried.
The defence of the appellant was of total denial and false implication. The court said that the
accused neither made any demand for cash or valuables, now tried to snatch jewellery or
keys, the court found that accused had no intention to commit robbery so the section 393and
394 of IPC not attracted.
ATTEMPT TO SUICIDE
COMMON LAW

At common law suicide was considered both criminal and felonious, although the punishment
except of an anticipatory dread was of necessity visited upon the innocent, and under some
statutes it is still so regarded. Under other statutes, however, it is held that suicide is not a
crime since the person guilty of the act cannot be punished, although an attempt to commit
suicide is criminal.5
Laws against suicide (and attempted suicide) prevailed in English common law until 1961.
English law perceived suicide as an immoral, criminal offence against God and also against
3 2010 Cr LJ 3349 (Jha)
4 2008 Cr LJ 2309 (Bom)
5 37 Cyclopaedia of Law and Procedure William Mack ed. 1911

the Crown. It first became illegal in the 13th century. Until 1822, in fact, the possessions of
somebody who committed suicide could even be forfeited to the Crown.
The common law endeavoured to deter men from this crime by the treat of degradations to be
inflicted upon the suicides corpse, and also by threatening the forfeiture of his goods. Thus
the man who feloniously took his own life was life was at one times buried in the highway,
with a stake thought his body; and his goods were forfeited. In 1824 this mode was replaced
by the practice of burial between the hours of nine and twelve at night, without any service.
The forfeited Act, 1870, abolished confiscated of goods of suicides in the general abolition of
forfeitures for felony. And in 1882 every penalty were removed, except the purely
ecclesiastical one that the interment to be solemnized by a burial service in the full ordinary
Anglican form.6
SUICIDE IN ANCIENT INDIA
Suicide was permissible in certain circumstances in ancient India. This is evident the
statement of Manu when he says:-A Brahmana having got rid of his body by one of those
modes (i.e. drowning, precipitation, bouning or starvation) practiced by the great sagas, is
exalted in th world of Brahmana, free sorrow and fear. Govardana and Kulluka, while writing
commentaries on Manu said: A man may undertake the mahaprasathana, (great departure) on
a journey which ends in death, when he is incurably diseased, or meets with a great
misfortune, and that, it is not opposed to Vedic rules which forbid suicide7
Section 309 The Indian Penal Code
SUICIDE UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE
309. Attempt to commit suicide.Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act
towards the commission of such offence, shall he punished with simple imprisonment for a
term which may extend to one year [or with fine, or with both].
Maruti Shripati Dubal v. State of Maharashtra8
The petitioner is a police constable attached to the Bombay City Police Force. As of today he
has put in 19 years of service as constable. In 1981, he met with a road accident and suffered
head injuries, and although he recovered from them, he became mentally ill continues to be
so to some extent even till this date. In 1985 he was prosecute under section 309 of IPC that
he attempt to commit suicide but the Bombay High Court struck down the section 309, IPC
as ultra vires vide article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees right to life and liberty.
6 Kennyss outline
7 Laws of Manu, translated by Geoge Buhler, Scared Books of the East, F. Max
Muller (1967 reprint) vol. 25, p.206
8 1987 Cr LJ 743 (Bom.)

The court said the right to life includes the right to live as well as right to end ones life if
one so desires.
Gian Kaur vs. State of Punjab9
In this case a five judge Constitutional Bench held that the "right to life" is inherently
inconsistent with the "right to die" as is "death" with "life". In furtherance, the right to life,
which includes right to live with human dignity, would mean the existence of such a right up
to the natural end of life. It may further include "death with dignity" but such existence
should not be confused with unnatural extinction of life curtailing natural span of life. In
progression of the above, the constitutionality of Section 309 of the I.P.C, which makes
"attempt to suicide" an offence, was upheld, overruling the judgment in P. Rathinam's case.
REPEAL OF SECTION 309 FROM IPC
According to Law Commission of India, in its 210th Report, had recommended that Section
309 (attempt to commit suicide) of IPC needs to be effaced from the statute book. As law and
order is a state subject, views of States/UTs were requested on the recommendations of the
Law Commission. 18 states and 4 Union territory administrations have supported that Section
309 of the IPC may be deleted. Keeping in view the responses from the states/UTs, it has
been decided to delete Section 309 of IPC from the statute book. 10 And it should to
decriminized because from suicide there is no threat to society and law and order is made to
secure the society. When there is no need of such law then just repealed the unnecessary laws
from the statues.

9 AIR 1996 SC 946

10 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Government-decriminalizes-attemptto-commit-suicide-removes-section-309/articleshow/45452253.cms