Doctrinal analysis reveals statutory ambiguities in Section 304 under Indian criminal jurisprudence, highlighting investigative and prosecutorial challenges.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 has incorporated Section 304, which for the first time in the Indian criminal law recognizes snatching as an independent offence. Before the introduction of this law, the cases involving chain snatching, mobile phone snatching, and other similar offences were tried under the provisions dealing with theft or robbery under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Though, the objective of the legislation was to counter the increasing cases of street crimes by means of introducing an independent statutory offence, but the provision itself has generated several issues with respect to its interpretation because of undefined terms such as “suddenly”, “quickly”, and “forcibly”. This paper has made an attempt to conduct the doctrinal analysis of Section 304 by understanding the legislative rationale behind its introduction, highlighting the basic elements of the offence and studying the evolving judicial interpretation with respect to the case of State v. Suhail (2026). This research paper has also attempted to make a comparison between the offences of snatching, theft and robbery and has pointed out the problems that might be faced in the process of investigation, prosecution, and judicial application.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Himani Deshpande (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: