IPC Section 398 – Attempt to Commit Robbery or Dacoity When Armed with Deadly Weapon

Section Overview

Section Number:

IPC Section 398

Section Title:

Attempt to Commit Robbery or Dacoity When Armed with Deadly Weapon

Act:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)

Status:

Replaced under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 with similar provisions on armed attempts of robbery and dacoity.

Applicability:

IPC Section 398 applies when:

• A person attempts to commit robbery or dacoity;

• The offender is armed with a deadly weapon at the time of attempt;

• The offence is not completed;

• The intention to commit robbery/dacoity is clearly established.

👉 This section deals with enhanced punishment for armed attempts.

Section Explanation

Simple Explanation (Plain English/Hinglish)

IPC Section 398 ka simple matlab hai ki agar koi person robbery ya dacoity karne ki koshish karta hai aur uske paas deadly weapon hota hai, to usko aur serious punishment milti hai, chahe robbery complete na hui ho.

Simple words mein:

"Armed robbery/dacoity ki koshish bhi crime hai aur IPC 398 ke under punishable hai."

Legal Meaning

Section 398 applies when:

• There is an attempt to commit robbery or dacoity;

• The offender is carrying or using a deadly weapon;

• The offence is not completed;

• The intention and preparation are both present.

Essential Ingredients

 Attempt to Commit Robbery or Dacoity

• There must be a direct attempt;

• Mere preparation is not sufficient.

 Presence of Deadly Weapon

The accused must be armed with a weapon such as:

• Knife;

• Gun;

• Sword;

• Any object capable of causing serious injury or death.

 Intention to Commit Offence

Clear intention to commit robbery or dacoity must exist.

 No Completion Required

Even if no property is taken, the offence is punishable.

Punishment & Legal Classification

Punishment

IPC Section 398 provides:

• Imprisonment up to 7 years; AND

• Fine.

👉 The punishment reflects seriousness of armed criminal attempts.

Bailable / Non-Bailable

❌ Non-Bailable

Cognizable / Non-Cognizable

✔ Cognizable

Compoundable

❌ Non-Compoundable

Triable By

Magistrate of First Class

IPC ↔ BNS Mapping

IPC Section

IPC Section 398

BNS Equivalent

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita retains provisions relating to:

• Armed attempt of robbery/dacoity;

• Violent preparatory offences;

• Threat-based criminal attempts.

Status

Concept retained under BNS.

Real-Life Examples

Example 1: Failed Armed Robbery

A person enters a shop with a knife intending to rob but is arrested before taking anything.

Section 398 applies.

Example 2: Attempted Bank Robbery with Gun

An offender enters a bank with a firearm but is stopped by security.

IPC 398 applies.

Example 3: Armed Dacoity Attempt

A group of armed persons attempts robbery but fails.

Section 398 applies.

Example 4: Vehicle Hijack Attempt

A person armed with a weapon tries to stop a car for robbery.

Section 398 applies.

Landmark Judgments

Case Name:

Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar

Court:

Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

An attempt begins when acts go beyond preparation and move toward commission of the offence.

Case Name:

State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yakub

Court:

Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

Distinction between preparation and attempt is crucial in criminal law.

Case Name:

Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab

Court:

Supreme Court of India

Key Takeaway:

Overt acts connected to commission of offence establish attempt liability.

Legal Insights

When Is Section 398 Applied?

Section 398 is applied when:

• There is an attempt to commit robbery/dacoity;

• The offender is armed;

• The act is interrupted before completion;

• Serious danger is posed to victims.

Difference Between IPC 397 and 398

👉 Section 397 = completed offence involvement
👉 Section 398 = attempted offence stage

Defenses Available

No Attempt Proven

Only preparation occurred, not attempt.

No Weapon Carried

Accused was not armed with a deadly weapon.

Lack of Intent

No intention to commit robbery/dacoity.

False Implication

Accused wrongly identified.

Insufficient Evidence

No overt act linking accused to attempt.