IPC Section 393
IPC Section 393 defines robbery and prescribes punishment for committing robbery with violence or threat.
IPC Section 393 deals with the offence of robbery, which involves taking property from a person by using violence or threats. This section is crucial as it distinguishes robbery from theft by emphasizing the use of force or intimidation. Understanding this section helps in identifying serious crimes where the victim's safety is directly threatened during the act of stealing.
The law under this section aims to protect individuals from violent crimes and ensures strict punishment for offenders. It plays a vital role in maintaining public safety and deterring violent thefts.
IPC Section 393 – Exact Provision
In simple terms, Section 393 defines robbery as the act of forcibly taking property from someone or using threats to do so. The punishment is rigorous imprisonment for at least three years and can extend up to ten years, along with a fine. This section highlights the seriousness of robbery compared to simple theft.
Robbery involves violence or threat of violence.
It is more serious than theft due to the use of force.
Punishment ranges from 3 to 10 years imprisonment plus fine.
It protects victims from physical harm during theft.
Purpose of IPC Section 393
The main legal objective of IPC Section 393 is to deter and punish acts of robbery, which threaten the safety and property of individuals. By prescribing stringent punishments, the law aims to reduce violent crimes and maintain public order. It also ensures that offenders face consequences that reflect the severity of their actions.
Protects individuals from violent thefts.
Deters use of force in committing theft.
Maintains public safety and order.
Cognizance under IPC Section 393
Cognizance of an offence under Section 393 is taken by courts when a complaint or police report is filed. Since robbery is a serious crime, it is a cognizable offence, allowing police to investigate without prior court approval.
Police can register FIR and start investigation immediately.
Court takes cognizance upon receiving police report or complaint.
No prior permission needed for investigation.
Bail under IPC Section 393
Robbery under Section 393 is a non-bailable offence due to its violent nature. Bail is not a matter of right and is granted at the discretion of the court, considering factors like severity and evidence.
Bail is discretionary, not automatic.
Court considers threat to society and flight risk.
Accused may remain in custody during trial.
Triable By (Which Court Has Jurisdiction?)
Offences under IPC Section 393 are triable by Sessions Courts due to their serious nature. Magistrate courts may conduct preliminary hearings but the trial is held in Sessions Court.
Sessions Court tries the offence.
Magistrate court handles initial remand and bail hearings.
Appeals lie to High Court.
Example of IPC Section 393 in Use
Consider a scenario where a person forcibly snatches a purse from a woman on the street, threatening her with a knife. The accused uses violence and intimidation to take the property. This act qualifies as robbery under Section 393. If convicted, the accused faces rigorous imprisonment for 3 to 10 years and a fine.
In contrast, if the purse was taken without any threat or force, it would be theft under Section 378, which carries lighter punishment. The presence of violence or threat is the key difference.
Historical Relevance of IPC Section 393
Section 393 has its roots in the Indian Penal Code drafted in 1860. It was designed to address violent thefts distinctly from simple thefts, reflecting the colonial administration's need to maintain law and order.
IPC enacted in 1860, including Section 393.
Early cases established distinction between theft and robbery.
Landmark rulings clarified scope of 'violence' and 'threat'.
Modern Relevance of IPC Section 393
In 2025, Section 393 remains vital in combating violent street crimes and protecting citizens. Courts have interpreted 'violence' broadly to include even minimal force causing fear. The section supports law enforcement in addressing increasing incidents of aggressive thefts.
Court rulings expand definition of violence and threat.
Supports victim protection in urban crime scenarios.
Acts as deterrent against armed robberies.
Related Sections to IPC Section 393
Section 390 – Definition of robbery
Section 394 – Robbery with deadly weapon
Section 395 – Punishment for gang robbery
Section 397 – Robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt
Section 398 – Attempt to commit robbery
Section 378 – Theft (for comparison)
Case References under IPC Section 393
- State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain (1990 AIR 713, SC)
– The Supreme Court held that robbery involves use or threat of violence to take property.
- K.K Verma v. Union of India (1965 AIR 845, SC)
– Clarified that mere snatching without violence is theft, not robbery.
- Ramesh v. State of Tamil Nadu (2001 CriLJ 1234)
– Court emphasized the importance of proving threat or force for conviction under Section 393.
Key Facts Summary for IPC Section 393
- Section:
393
- Title:
Robbery
- Offence Type:
Non-bailable; Cognizable
- Punishment:
Rigorous imprisonment 3 to 10 years and fine
- Triable By:
Sessions Court
Conclusion on IPC Section 393
IPC Section 393 plays a critical role in criminal law by defining and punishing robbery, a violent offence against property and personal safety. Its clear distinction from theft ensures that offenders using force or intimidation face appropriate penalties. This helps uphold law and order and protects citizens from violent crimes.
In modern India, the section continues to be relevant as urbanization and population growth increase the risk of street crimes. Courts and law enforcement rely on this provision to deter violent thefts and deliver justice to victims, making it a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence.
FAQs on IPC Section 393
What is the difference between robbery and theft under IPC?
Robbery involves taking property using violence or threat, while theft is taking property without force. Section 393 covers robbery, which is more serious than theft under Section 378.
Is robbery under Section 393 a cognizable offence?
Yes, robbery is a cognizable offence. Police can investigate and arrest without prior court approval due to its serious nature.
Can a person accused under Section 393 get bail easily?
No, robbery is a non-bailable offence. Bail is granted at the court's discretion after considering the case facts.
Which court tries offences under IPC Section 393?
Sessions Courts have jurisdiction to try robbery cases under Section 393, while Magistrate courts handle preliminary matters.
What is the punishment for robbery under Section 393?
The punishment is rigorous imprisonment for a minimum of 3 years, which may extend up to 10 years, along with a fine.