Supreme Court alters robbery conviction to grievous hurt over missing evidence

The case concerns an appeal by a man convicted of robbery under Section 394 IPC for an incident in 1993, where the Supreme Court examined whether the evidence sufficiently proved the element of robbery or if the conviction should be altered to a lesser offense.

Who it concerns: Petitioner/Appellant: Appa; Respondent: The State of Maharashtra; Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekar.

What the court decided

• The Court held that the conviction under Section 394 IPC (Robbery) could not be sustained due to lack of evidence linking the appellant to the theft of jewelry.
• The Court altered the conviction to Section 325 IPC (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt) based on proven evidence that the appellant caused the complainant to lose a tooth.
• The Court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant (approximately 10 months) and maintained the fine of ₹1,000.
• The Court ordered the appellant to be released forthwith unless required in custody for another case.

Also in the document

• The Court noted the appellant was approximately 63-64 years old at the time of the judgment.
• The Court cited the principle of cognate offences to justify convicting for a lesser offense (Section 325 IPC) when the major offense (Section 394 IPC) was not fully proved.
• The judgment was dated October 7, 2026.