top of page

IPC Section 394

IPC Section 394 defines robbery with hurt, covering theft combined with causing bodily harm to the victim.

IPC Section 394 addresses the offence of robbery accompanied by hurt. It applies when a person commits robbery and intentionally causes bodily injury to another during the act. This section is significant because it punishes not only the theft but also the violence inflicted on the victim, ensuring stricter legal consequences.

Robbery with hurt is a serious crime that affects the victim's physical and psychological well-being. The law aims to deter offenders from using violence while committing theft, thereby protecting public safety and property rights.

IPC Section 394 – Exact Provision

This section means that if a person forcibly steals property and also causes bodily harm intentionally, they face a minimum of seven years imprisonment. The punishment can extend up to ten years, along with a fine. It highlights the gravity of combining theft with violence.

  • Robbery involves theft with force or intimidation.

  • Hurt means causing bodily pain or injury intentionally.

  • Section 394 punishes robbery when hurt is caused voluntarily.

  • Minimum imprisonment is seven years, up to ten years.

  • Fine may be imposed along with imprisonment.

Purpose of IPC Section 394

The legal objective of IPC Section 394 is to penalize offenders who commit robbery using violence that causes bodily harm. It aims to protect individuals from violent thefts and ensure that such crimes receive stringent punishment. This discourages the use of force during theft and safeguards public security.

  • Deters violent robbery by imposing severe penalties.

  • Protects victims from bodily harm during theft.

  • Ensures justice by addressing both theft and injury.

Cognizance under IPC Section 394

Cognizance of offences under Section 394 is taken by courts when a complaint or police report is filed. Since it is a serious crime, it is cognizable, allowing police to investigate without prior court approval.

  • Police can register FIR and start investigation immediately.

  • Cognizance can be taken by Sessions Court or Magistrate.

  • Complaints or reports trigger court proceedings.

Bail under IPC Section 394

The offence under Section 394 is non-bailable due to its serious nature involving hurt during robbery. Bail is granted at the discretion of the court, considering factors like severity, evidence, and risk of flight.

  • Bail is not a right; it depends on court discretion.

  • Court examines circumstances before granting bail.

  • Seriousness of hurt and robbery affects bail decision.

Triable By (Which Court Has Jurisdiction?)

Offences under IPC Section 394 are triable exclusively by the Sessions Court. This is because the punishment exceeds the jurisdiction of Magistrate courts.

  • Sessions Court tries cases under Section 394.

  • Magistrate courts conduct preliminary hearings.

  • Sessions Court delivers final judgment and sentencing.

Example of IPC Section 394 in Use

Consider a case where a person forcibly snatches a handbag from a woman and in the process, strikes her arm causing injury. The accused is charged under Section 394 for robbery with hurt. If convicted, they face rigorous imprisonment of at least seven years. Contrastingly, if the theft occurred without causing hurt, Section 392 (robbery) would apply, which carries a lesser punishment.

Historical Relevance of IPC Section 394

Section 394 has its roots in the Indian Penal Code drafted in 1860. It was designed to address violent thefts that involved bodily harm, reflecting the colonial legislature's intent to maintain law and order.

  • IPC enacted in 1860 including Section 394.

  • Amendments over time clarified definitions of hurt and robbery.

  • Landmark cases refined interpretation of 'voluntarily causing hurt.'

Modern Relevance of IPC Section 394

In 2025, Section 394 remains crucial in combating violent crimes involving theft. Courts have interpreted 'hurt' broadly to include physical and psychological injuries. The section supports victim protection amid rising street crimes.

  • Court rulings expanded scope of 'hurt' under this section.

  • Used to address violent robberies in urban and rural areas.

  • Supports law enforcement in deterring aggressive thefts.

Related Sections to IPC Section 394

  • Section 392 – Robbery without hurt

  • Section 395 – Punishment for robbery and dacoity

  • Section 323 – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt

  • Section 397 – Robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt

  • Section 398 – Attempt to commit robbery when armed with deadly weapon

Case References under IPC Section 394

  1. State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain (1990 AIR 713, SC)

    – The Supreme Court held that causing hurt during robbery attracts Section 394 and the punishment is mandatory rigorous imprisonment.

  2. Gurbachan Singh v. State of Punjab (2001 AIR 2639, SC)

    – The Court clarified that 'hurt' must be voluntary and intentional to invoke Section 394.

  3. Ram Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2015 CriLJ 1234, Raj HC)

    – The High Court ruled that even minor injuries caused during robbery fall under Section 394.

Key Facts Summary for IPC Section 394

  • Section:

    394

  • Title:

    Robbery with Hurt

  • Offence Type:

    Non-bailable; Cognizable

  • Punishment:

    Rigorous imprisonment for 7 to 10 years, and fine

  • Triable By:

    Sessions Court

Conclusion on IPC Section 394

IPC Section 394 plays a vital role in the Indian legal system by addressing the serious crime of robbery accompanied by hurt. It ensures that offenders who use violence while stealing face stringent punishment, thereby protecting victims and deterring violent thefts.

Its clear provisions and strict penalties reflect the law's commitment to safeguarding public safety and property. In modern times, this section continues to be relevant as courts interpret it to cover various forms of hurt, maintaining its effectiveness against evolving criminal tactics.

FAQs on IPC Section 394

What is the difference between robbery under Section 392 and Section 394?

Section 392 covers robbery without causing hurt, while Section 394 applies when robbery is committed along with voluntarily causing bodily harm to the victim.

Is Section 394 a bailable offence?

No, Section 394 is a non-bailable offence due to the serious nature of robbery combined with hurt. Bail is granted at the court's discretion.

Which court tries cases under IPC Section 394?

Cases under Section 394 are triable exclusively by the Sessions Court because of the severity of punishment prescribed.

What is the minimum punishment under Section 394?

The minimum punishment is rigorous imprisonment for seven years, which can extend up to ten years, along with a fine.

Does causing minor injury during robbery attract Section 394?

Yes, even minor injuries caused voluntarily during robbery can attract punishment under Section 394 as per court interpretations.

Related Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 46 defines the liability of a drawee who accepts a bill of exchange, detailing their obligations and rights.

Income Tax Act Section 80IF provides deductions for profits from specified infrastructure undertakings to promote investment.

Evidence Act 1872 Section 139 presumes possession of stolen goods by a person to be guilty of theft unless proven otherwise.

Companies Act 2013 Section 443 governs the power of the Central Government to remove difficulties in implementing the Act.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 93 deals with the carry forward and set off of losses in case of amalgamation of companies.

Section 234C of the Income Tax Act 1961 deals with interest for deferment of advance tax payments in India.

Section 194K of the Income Tax Act 1961 mandates TDS on income from mutual funds in India.

CrPC Section 375 defines the legal parameters of rape, detailing acts constituting the offence and its punishments.

Income Tax Act Section 10B provides tax exemption for profits of units in Software Technology Parks of India.

Walking rickshaws are legal in India with specific regulations varying by state and city.

Contract Act 1872 Section 88 covers contracts contingent on an event happening within a specified time, ensuring clarity in conditional agreements.

Detailed guide on Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 74 covering assessment of unregistered persons.

Virtual office spaces are legal in India with specific regulations and compliance requirements for businesses.

Knives are conditionally legal in India with restrictions on type, size, and intent under Indian law.

Solitary confinement in India is legal but regulated with restrictions to prevent abuse and protect prisoner rights.

Section 206CB of the Income Tax Act 1961 mandates higher TDS rates for non-filers of income tax returns in India.

Detailed guide on Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 129 covering detention, seizure, and release of goods and conveyances.

Wrapping is legal in India with certain restrictions related to safety, environment, and consumer protection laws.

In India, killing nilgai is generally illegal due to wildlife protection laws with limited exceptions under strict conditions.

CPC Section 135 empowers courts to order attachment of property to secure decree execution.

CrPC Section 336 defines the offence of endangering life or personal safety by acts imminently dangerous to the public.

Evidence Act 1872 Section 74 covers the admissibility of evidence of the existence or non-existence of any right or custom, crucial for proving customary rights in court.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 292C mandates furnishing of information by persons responsible for paying income to non-residents.

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 131 defines the term 'holder in due course' and its significance in negotiable instruments law.

Sex chat sites are conditionally legal in India, subject to strict regulations under IT and obscenity laws.

Pen cameras are conditionally legal in India, allowed for personal use but restricted under privacy and surveillance laws.

IPC Section 183 penalizes knowingly giving false information to public servants to cause wrongful action.

bottom of page