Can Non Recovery of Weapon be a Ground for Discharge U/s 397 IPC?
Can Non Recovery of Weapon be a Ground for Discharge U/s 397 IPC?
The Delhi High Court has decided whether charges under Section 397 IPC, which provides for the offence of committing robbery or dacoity with the intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm to a person, can be filed if the weapon has not been recovered.
The single-judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing a Revision Petition filed by the State challenging an order passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, which held that the offence under Section 397 IPC was not made out against the accused-respondent and remanded the case to the CMM for framing of charges under Section 392 IPC.
Background
The accused-respondent provided a disclosure statement in which he admitted to committing an offence in which he and others threatened some men with a pistol and demanded that they hand over all of their belongings.
The District and Sessions Judge of Patiala House Courts ruled in the case that because the pistol was only brandished and not fired, the offence under Section 397 IPC could not be proven.
The State has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in response to the aforementioned ruling.
Observation of the Delhi High Court
After considering the facts of the case and listening to both Counsels, the Court concluded that the fact that a weapon had not been recovered was not a reason for not filing charges under Section 397 IPC.
It went on to say that the effect of the weapon’s non-recovery would be seen only during the trial and that this could not be used to justify not filing charge Sheet under Section 397 of the IPC.
The Court also cited a Supreme Court decision in Phool Kumar vs. Delhi Administration, which held that the term “use” would include brandishing a weapon against another person in order to overpower or frighten his victim.
There was also reliance on Govind Dipaji More v. State, in which the Supreme Court upheld the Bombay High Court decision by observing that if the knife was used for the purpose of casting 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.
Comment / Reply From
You May Also Like
Popular Posts
Vote / Poll
Would you be interested in providing content for this newsletter?
Newsletter
Subscribe to our mailing list to get the new updates!