1. ROBBERY
The parties in this issue are A, as the accused and B, as the victim. The issue is whether A
may be held liable for committing robbery as defined under section 390 and punishable under
section 392 for the act committed to B.
LAW PRINCIPLE
• STATE SECTION 390 (1).
• STATE SECTION 390 (2). IF THEFT-> ROBBERY
• Nga Po Thet - the essence of robbery is that he offender, for committing theft, or in carrying
away of in attempting to carry away of property obtained by theft, commits one or the other
wrongful acts mention in section 390.
• Bishambhar Nath v Emperor – appellant tried luck at carnival – fight with manager for prizes
– remove cash from table – fight was not meant to rob – only convicted for theft.
• STATE SECTION 390 (3). IF EXTORTION -> ROBBERY
• EXTORTION -> ROBBERY =ILLUSTRATION (b) & (c) OF SECTION 390
APPLICATION
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, A may be held liable for committing robbery as defined under section 390 and
punishable under section 392 for the act committed to B.
)