S
Sahaj Vidhi
Law optional 2018 paper II

Six people decided to carry out dacoity of a bank in a village. They went to the bank to commit it, but were intercepted by police. All of them ran away. While the police was chasing them, one of the dacoits (X) killed Mr. Y, who tried to obstruct his way. Decide liability for the murder committed by one of them in view of Sections 391 and 396 of the Indian Penal Code.

Verified Answer
  1. Core Legal Answer & Context: This scenario involves a group of six individuals planning and attempting dacoity, as defined under Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). During their escape from the attempted dacoity, one member (X) commits murder to overcome an obstruction. The central legal question is to determine the collective liability of all six members for the murder committed by one, specifically under Section 396 IPC.

Section 396 IPC deals with 'Dacoity with murder'. It stipulates that if any one of five or more persons, who are conjointly committing dacoity, commits murder in the course of committing such dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Key elements for Section 396 to apply:

  • There must be five or more persons conjointly committing dacoity. In this case, there are six individuals.
  • One of these persons must commit murder.
  • The murder must be committed 'in the course of committing dacoity'. The phrase 'in the course of committing dacoity' has been interpreted broadly by courts to include acts done during the preparation, actual commission, and the immediate escape from the dacoity. The interception by police and the subsequent escape, during which the murder occurs to facilitate the escape, clearly fall within this ambit. Mr. Y's obstruction directly relates to their attempt to escape after the dacoity was intercepted.

Therefore, the murder committed by X to facilitate the escape of the dacoits is directly linked to the dacoity, making all six individuals liable under Section 396 IPC.

  1. Relevant Statutes and Sections:
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860:
    • Section 391: Defines 'Dacoity' as robbery committed by five or more persons conjointly.
    • Section 396: Prescribes punishment for 'Dacoity with murder', making all participants liable for murder committed by one during dacoity.
    • Section 300: Defines 'Murder'.
    • Section 302: Prescribes punishment for 'Murder'.
  1. Important Landmark Cases:
  • State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel Koli (AIR 1997 SC 1363): The Supreme Court emphasized that the phrase 'in the course of committing dacoity' covers acts done during the commission and immediate escape. It held that all dacoits are liable under Section 396 if murder is committed by one of them during this period.
  • Mohan Singh v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 107): This case reiterated that for Section 396, it is not necessary that the murder should have been committed by all the dacoits. If one of them commits murder in the course of dacoity, all are equally liable, irrespective of their direct involvement in the killing.
  1. Clear Conclusion: All six individuals involved in the attempted dacoity would be held liable for the murder of Mr. Y under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. Even though only X committed the murder, it was done 'in the course of committing dacoity' (specifically, during the escape from the attempted dacoity to overcome an obstruction). Since there were five or more persons conjointly attempting dacoity, the conditions for Section 396 are met, making every one of them equally liable for the murder, irrespective of who actually struck the fatal blow.