Topic
Dacoity under Indian law refers to robbery committed by five or more persons, governed by Sections 391 to 402 of the Indian Penal Code. This page provides latest judgments, case analyses, and court updates on convictions, evidentiary requirements like Test Identification Parades.
The Delhi High Court acquitted three accused, holding the prosecution failed to prove the five-person assembly required under Sections 399/402 IPC. It also deemed the police’s contradictory testimony and the alleged overheard conversation implausible, rendering the evidence inadmissible.
The Allahabad High Court acquitted appellants under Sections 399 and 402 IPC, holding that assembling armed near a target location, even with suspicious behavior, cannot substitute for evidence of shared criminal intent to commit dacoity. This ruling reinforces that prosecution must prove mens rea beyond reasonable doubt - a vital safeguard for individuals caught in circumstantial proximity to crime.
Patna High Court ruled that conviction under Section 395 IPC cannot rely solely on a single identification, especially when contradicted by close relatives. The judgment underscores the necessity of corroborative evidence to uphold dacoity charges, reinforcing the standard of reasonable doubt in criminal trials.
Calcutta High Court acquitted appellants in a dacoity case, ruling that a delayed test identification parade and inconsistent witness statements without corroborative evidence cannot sustain conviction. The judgment underscores that recovery from one accused does not implicate co-accused without direct evidence, reinforcing strict standards for identification evidence under the Indian Evidence Act.
Allahabad High Court rules that conviction under Sections 399/402 IPC for dacoity requires participation of five or more persons. The court quashed the conviction where only three accused were arrested, reinforcing the statutory threshold for the offence. The Arms Act conviction was upheld but substituted with probation.
Allahabad High Court acquits appellants in dacoity case, holding that eyewitness testimony tainted by enmity and absence of recovered loot cannot sustain conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
Jharkhand High Court acquits appellants in dacoity case due to inconsistent testimony, lack of Test Identification Parade, and failure to recover incriminating evidence.