LexVENU @ VENUGOPAL AND ORS versus STATE OF KARNATAKA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 224 A VENU @ VENUGOPAL AND ORS ...,. v. ,.. STATE OF KARNATAKA (Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2008) B JANUARY 30, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - s. 392 - Punishment for robbery - --; Commission of robbery on the highway by threatening with c knife - Conviction u/s. 395 with 10 years imprisonment - High ~ ' Court convicting uls 392 but upholding the sentence - · Correctness of - Held: When robbery is committed on a highway, deterrent punishment is to be imposed - On facts, ~ . robbery committed on the highway between sunset and D sunrise and commission of robbery by accused persons was clearly established - Thus, order of High Court upheld - Sentence/Sentencing. ""'" s. 392 - Necessary ingredients - Explained. :i;,..-r E According to the prosecution case, the accused persons robbed the PWs 2 and 3 of their belongings on . ; the highway by threatening them with knife. FIR was lodged. Accused persons were arrested and at their instance stolen articles were recovered. The scooter used in the commission of offence was seized. The victims F identified A-2 to A-5 as persons who robbed them. The :4· ... trial court convicted A-2 to A-5 for offence punishable under section 395 and . imposed 10 years imprisonment. However, the other accused were acquitted. The High Court convicted the appellants under section 392 IPC but G upheld the order of sentence. Hence the present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court ')-- HELD: 1.1 Section 392 provides punishment for robbery. It is punishment for the offence defined in Section • H 224 .. - J- VENU @ VENUGOPAL AND ORS v. STATE OF 225 ) KARNATAKA · -~ 390. Punishment is higher if it is committed on a highway A and between sunset and sunrise. (Para 7) (228-8) 1.2. Section 390 IPC defines robbery which is theft or extortion when caused with fear of death, hurt or wrongful restraint. When there is no theft committed, then B as a natural corollary there cannot be robbery. Robbery is only an aggravated form of offence of theft or extortion. ~ Aggravation is in the use of fear of death, hurt or restraint. Violence must be in course of theft and not subsequently. It is not neeessary that violence actually should be committed but even attempt to commit it is enough. The' c words 'for that end' in section 390 clearly mean that the hurt caused. must be with the object of facilitating the committing of ·the theft or must be caused while the offender is committing theft or is carrying away or is attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft. D [Paras 8 and 10) [228-G; 229-A; 230-8) 'l" ~ 2. In the instant case, the evidence of the victim, her husband., the factum of recovery of the vehicle used clearly established the commission of offence by the E appellants. The offence was committed on a public road. There is no dispute that it was a highway and that the offence was committed between sunset and sunrise that is, at about 9.00 p.m. [Para 12] [230-D] ~ State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja 2004 (1) SCC 475 - relied F .)._ on. CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2008. From the final Judgment and Order dated 6.6.2006 of the G High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Crl. A. No. 1146/2004. - -< Rachna Joshi (A.C.) for the Appellants. Anitha Shenoy for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by H 226 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008) 2 S.C.R. A Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order of a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court holding the appellants guilty of offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and sentencing each of B 10 years imprisonment. 3. Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows: On 24.6.2001 at 9.00 p.m. on Mulbagal-Punganoor road PWs 2 and 3 were going on a Bajaj Scooter. When they were C near 'Kirumani Mitta' of 'Buddadoru village", accused persons 2 to 5 intercepted PWs 2 and 3, and robbed the gold chain, golden ear drops, thali and cash of Rs.400/- by threatening with knife. The accused tied the legs and hands of PW-2 and PW-3 and threatened .them not to escape and get out from the place D for about ten minutes after their departure. The victims went to Punganoor Police Station and later on lodged First Information Report with Nangali Police (Kolar Dist.) on 25.6.2001. The Traffic P
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.