MCQ 14 Dec 2023

Daily practice questions for CLAT - (14 December 2023)



Robbery is a special and aggravated form of either theft or extortion. The chief distinguishing element in the robbery is the presence of imminent fear of violence. The second paragraph distinguishes robbery from theft; the third distinguishes it from extortion. There can be no case of robbery which does not fall within the definition either of theft or of extortion; but in practice, it will perpetually be a matter of doubt whether a particular act of robbery was theft or extortion. A large proportion of robberies will be half theft, half extortion. When there is no theft, as a natural corollary, there cannot be robbery. Robbery is only an aggravated form of theft or extortion. Violence must be in the course of theft and not subsequently. Also, it is not necessary that violence should actually be committed, even an attempt to commit it is enough.

Dacoity is robbery committed by five or more persons; otherwise, there is no difference between dacoity and robbery. The gravity of the offence consists in the terror it causes by the presence of a number of offenders. Abettors who are present and aiding when the crime is committed are counted in the number. When five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission and attempt amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit 'dacoity'. Section 396 IPC, 1860 brings within its ambit a murder committed along with 'dacoity'. In terms of this provision, if any one of the five or more persons, who are conjointly committing dacoity, commits murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished. On a plain reading of these provisions, it is clear that to constitute an offence of 'dacoity', robbery essentially should be committed by five or more persons. Similarly, to constitute an offence of 'dacoity with murder' any one of the five or more persons should commit murder while committing the dacoity, then every one of such persons so committing, attempting to commit or aiding, by the fiction of law, would be deemed to have committed the offence of murder and be liable for punishment provided under these provisions depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.

Question1:- Which of the following is the significant feature of the offence of robbery, making it different from the theft?
  • A. Fear of grievous hurt
  • B. Fear of wrongful restraint
  • C. Fear of wrongful confinement
  • D. Fear of assault
Answer is B is correct. According to the principle enshrined under Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code, robbery is a severe form of theft or extortion and hence is different from these offences in gravity as well as in punishment. A theft may be inferred as an offence of robbery when there is a fear of death, or hurt, or wrongful restraint upon the victim by the offender. There is no requirement for the existence of fear of grievous hurt or wrongful confinement. Therefore, the correct option is (b).
Question2:- Mr. A and Mr. Z are childhood friends as well as business partners. However, due to a serious argument between the two, Mr. A leaves the company after taking his share of the investment. Soon, Mr. A starts losing his money and wealth in gambling and thus becomes bankrupt. One day Mr. A sees Mr. Z with lots of gifts. He hatches a plan to fraudulently take away everything in the possession of Mr. Z. He holds Mr. Z down in the parking lot and fraudulently takes Mr. Z's money and jewels from Z's clothes without Z's consent, by constantly threatening him. As a Court of competent jurisdiction, determine the criminal liability of Mr. A when he takes all the belongings of Mr. Z.
  • A. Mr. A has committed the offence of robbery
  • B. Mr. A has committed the offence of theft
  • C. Mr. A has committed the offence of extortion
  • D. Mr. A has committed the offence of criminal force
Answer is A is correct. Under the Indian Penal Code, the offence of robbery is constituted when a theft or extortion is carried out along with the threat of hurt, wrongful restraint, or death to the victim or any other person. When Mr. A threatens Mr. Z and takes away all his belongings without his consent, he is implying fear of hurt or wrongful restraint or death upon Mr. Z, thereby committing the offence of robbery which an aggravated form of theft or extortion. Criminal force is not an offence per se under the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the correct option is (a).
Question3:- Which of the following is incorrect about the offence of dacoity under the criminal law?
  • A. Dacoity is the only offence that the Legislature has made punishable at all the four stages of crime.
  • B. Attempting to commit dacoity and the actual commission of dacoity are treated alike under the Indian Penal Code.
  • C. Attempting to commit a robbery by five or more persons without being successful in getting anything is also punishable.
  • D. In circumstances, where the victim on seeing a large number of dacoits, do not offer any resistance, then the offence reduces to that of the theft.
Answer is D is correct. When five or more people conjointly commit the offence of robbery, then the same is treated as dacoity under the Code. Dacoity is perhaps the only offence that the Legislature has made punishable at four stages. When five or more persons assemble for the purpose of committing dacoity, each of them is punishable under section 402 merely on the ground of joining the assembly. Another stage is that of preparation and if anyone makes preparation to commit dacoity, he is punishable under section 399. The definition of 'dacoity' under the Code shows that the other two stages, i.e. attempting to commit and the actual commission of dacoity, have been treated alike. Merely attempting to commit dacoity, without being successful is also punishable. In the case of dacoity the circumstance that the inmates of the house, seeing a large number of dacoits, do not offer any resistance and no force or violence is required or used does not reduce the dacoity to theft. Therefore, the correct option is (d).
Question4:- Mr. X, Y, Z, A, and B were accused of committing the offence of dacoity upon a family in their village. However, during trial, Mr. A and B were acquitted by the Court. Considering the acquittal of Mr. A and B, the rest of the accused persons also pleaded for the acquittal.

As a court, decide the criminal liability of the accused persons in the above-mentioned case.
  • A. The two acquitted accused persons are not liable as they were passive participants only while the remaining persons are liable for the offence of dacoity.
  • B. The two acquitted accused persons are not liable and this dissolves the liability of the remaining accused persons as dacoity must be committed by five or more persons.
  • C. The two acquitted persons do not dissolve the criminal liability as dacoity is the only offence that is punishable at all the stages of the commission of a crime.
  • D. Only (a)
Answer is B is correct. In the cases of Debi, (1952) 2 Raj 177; Lingayya, AIR 1958 AP 510; Ram Shankar, 1956 Cr LJ 822 (SC); Khagendra Gahan, 1982 Cr LJ 487 (Ori); Ram Lekhan, 1983 Cr LJ 691 (1), the Courts have up held their opinion that the acquittal of any of the participants of dacoity also absolves the criminal liability of the remaining offenders as the offence of dacoity is could not be committed by less than five persons. Therefore, the correct option is (b).
Question5 :- A has stolen wallet of B. During the course of stealing, A attempted to hurt B. What will be the liability of A?
  • A. A has committed Robbery.
  • B. A has mere committed Theft.
  • C. A has no criminal Liability.
  • D. A is merely liable for grievous hurt.
Answer is A is correct. Robbery is only an aggravated form of theft or extortion. Violence must be in the course of theft and not subsequently. Also, it is not necessary that violence should actually be committed, even an attempt to commit it is enough. Here, A has attempted to hurt B in order to steal the wallet of B. This constitutes an offence of Robbery. Hence, option (a) is correct.