The Hindu : Opinion / News Analysis : Corrections and Clarifications

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Mar 14, 2007
ePaper


<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N4322.hinduonline/B2155503.3;abr=!ie;sz=468x60;ord=[timestamp]?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <A HREF="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N4322.hinduonline/B2155503.3;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=468x60;ord=[timestamp]?"> <IMG SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N4322.hinduonline/B2155503.3;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=468x60;ord=[timestamp]?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=468 HEIGHT=60 ALT="Click Here"></A> </NOSCRIPT>

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

Corrections and Clarifications

In "Robbery bid foiled in Punjab" (Delhi edition, "Briefly", March 12, 2007, page 5), it was stated that four armed dacoits made a bid to rob a jewellery shop. A reader points out that dacoit, a term used for a robber belonging to an armed gang, is a word derived from the Hindustani dakait, and being current in Bengal got into the Indian Penal Code. By law, to constitute dacoity, there must be five or more in the gang committing the crime. Robbery has been defined in Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code as: "In all robbery, there is either theft or extortion. Theft is `robbery' if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint." On dacoity, Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code says: "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 or attempt, amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit `dacoity'." In the case of the report, since the number of persons involved in this incident was less than five, the term robber would have been appropriate.

In a report on the all-England Open badminton, "Lin reaches final" ("Sport", March 11, 2007), the score in [top seeded title-holder] Lin Dan's semi-final match against Bao Chunlai, as mentioned in the text, should have been 21-14, 21-16, and not 21-14, 21-1. The results column gave the figures correctly.

In "Corrections and Clarifications" (March 13, 2007), the SCOPE Award given to Steel Authority of India should have been for 2004-05, and not 2004-04, as was published.

It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.

The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by

Telephone: +91-44-28418297 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);

Fax: +91-44-28552963;

E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings, 859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.

All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.

No personal visits.

The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion