The Delhi High Court has decided on whether charges under Section 397 IPC which provides for the offence of committing robbery, or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt to a person can be formed if weapon has not been recovered.
The single-judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a Revision Petition filed by the State challenging the order passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts wherein it was held that the offence under Section 397 IPC was not made out against the accused-respondent and the matter was sent to the CMM for framing of charge under Section 392 IPC.
Brief Facts of the Case
The accused-respondent had given a disclosure statement in which he confessed of having committed an offence wherein he along with others had threatened some men by brandishing a pistol and asked them to give all their belongings.
The District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, has held in the case that since the pistol was only brandished, and wasn't used, the offence under Section 397 IPC cannot be made out.
The State has approched the High Court against the said ruling.
High Court Observation
The Court upon noting the facts of the case and listening to both the Counsels, observed that the fact that a weapon has not been recovered is no ground for not framing charges under Section 397 IPC.
It further added that the effect of non recovery of the weapon would be seen only in the trial and the same cannot be a reason for not framing charges under Section 397 IPC.
The Court also relied on SC Judgement in Phool Kumar Vs. Delhi Administration, 1975 Latest Caselaw 71 SC in which it was held that the term 'use' would include brandishing the weapon against another person in order to overpower him or to frighten his victim.
Reliance was also placed on Govind Dipaji More v. State in which the SC upheld the Bombay High Court judgement by observing that that if the knife was used for the purpose of producing such an impression upon the mind of a person that he would be compelled to part with his property, that would amount to ‘using’ the weapon within the meaning of Section 397 IPC.
Read Order Here:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
