Section 324 defines mischief — intentionally, or knowing it is likely, causing wrongful loss or damage by destroying property or by changing it so that its value or usefulness is reduced — and then sets out five punishment tiers. The tiers run from imprisonment of up to six months for basic mischief to imprisonment of up to five years, depending on the kind of property involved, the amount of loss or damage caused, or whether the offender had prepared to cause death, hurt or wrongful restraint. It brings together four sections of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860 and adds two new sub-sections.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal) and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts. Section 324 is marked as changed in the concordance. It draws on four sections of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 425, 426, 427 and 440) and adds two sub-sections, (3) and (5), that the concordance shows as new. Structurally, four IPC sections are merged into this one section, but each old section corresponds to a single sub-section, so each row is labelled by its own text comparison: sub-sections (1) and (6) are Exact (drafting-level differences only), and sub-sections (2) and (4) are Substantively changed:
| BNS 324(x) | Covers | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | Definition of “mischief” | S.425 “Mischief” | Exact |
| (2) | Punishment for mischief | S.426 “Punishment for mischief” | Substantively changed |
| (3) | Mischief causing loss or damage to any property including property of Government or Local Authority | None — new sub-section | No predecessor |
| (4) | Mischief causing loss or damage of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees | S.427 “Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees” | Substantively changed |
| (5) | Mischief causing loss or damage of one lakh rupees or upwards | None — new sub-section | No predecessor |
| (6) | Mischief after preparation for causing death, hurt or wrongful restraint | S.440 “Mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt” | Exact |
Structurally, IPC Sections 425, 426, 427 and 440 are merged into this one section (with sub-sections (3) and (5) added); the substantive changes are in sub-sections (2) and (4). A word-by-word comparison of the bare text of BNS Section 324 against IPC Sections 425, 426, 427 and 440 shows the following. Sub-section (1) carries over the definition of mischief in IPC Section 425 together with both Explanations and all eight illustrations; the only differences are typographical (IPC 425 prints the word “mischief” in quotation marks in its defining line and prints “in to” and “there by” where the BNS reads “into” and “thereby”, and the punctuation after the Explanation numbers differs). Sub-section (2) is the punishment provision of IPC Section 426, and the one change is the ceiling: three months in IPC 426, six months in BNS 324(2); imprisonment of either description, or fine, or both, is unchanged. Sub-section (4) corresponds to IPC Section 427, which applied to loss or damage “to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards” and carried imprisonment of up to two years, or fine, or both; BNS 324(4) carries the same punishment but applies to loss or damage “to the amount of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees”, so the lower threshold rises from fifty rupees to twenty thousand rupees and an upper limit of one lakh rupees is introduced. Sub-section (3) (loss or damage to any property including the property of Government or Local Authority, up to one year) and sub-section (5) (loss or damage of one lakh rupees or upwards, up to five years) are shown in the concordance as new sub-sections. Sub-section (6) carries over IPC Section 440 (mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt) with the same punishment (imprisonment of either description for up to five years, and liability to fine); the single wording difference is that IPC 440 reads “fear of death, or hurt, or of wrongful restraint”, whereas BNS 324(6) reads “fear of death, or of hurt, or of wrongful restraint” (the word “of” is added before “hurt”).
(1) Whoever with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, commits mischief.
Explanation 1.—It is not essential to the offence of mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or damage to the owner of the property injured or destroyed. It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to any person by injuring any property, whether it belongs to that person or not.
Explanation 2.—Mischief may be committed by an act affecting property belonging to the person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly.
Illustrations.
(a) A voluntarily burns a valuable security belonging to Z intending to cause wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
(b) A introduces water into an ice-house belonging to Z and thus causes the ice to melt, intending wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
(c) A voluntarily throws into a river a ring belonging to Z, with the intention of thereby causing wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
(d) A, knowing that his effects are about to be taken in execution in order to satisfy a debt due from him to Z, destroys those effects, with the intention of thereby preventing Z from obtaining satisfaction of the debt, and of thus causing damage to Z. A has committed mischief.
(e) A having insured a ship, voluntarily causes the same to be cast away, with the intention of causing damage to the underwriters. A has committed mischief.
(f) A causes a ship to be cast away, intending thereby to cause damage to Z who has lent money on bottomry on the ship. A has committed mischief.
(g) A, having joint property with Z in a horse, shoots the horse, intending thereby to cause wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
(h) A causes cattle to enter upon a field belonging to Z, intending to cause and knowing that he is likely to cause damage to Z’s crop. A has committed mischief.
(2) Whoever commits mischief shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
(3) Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to any property including the property of Government or Local Authority shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
(4) Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
(5) Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of one lakh rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.
(6) Whoever commits mischief, having made preparation for causing to any person death, or hurt, or wrongful restraint, or fear of death, or of hurt, or of wrongful restraint, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Sub-section (1) defines the offence on which every tier in this section, and Sections 325 to 327, are built. The definition has two parts. The first is a mental element: the offender must act “with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person”. Intention and knowledge are alternatives, so an offender who did not set out to cause loss but knew it was likely to follow is covered. “Wrongful loss” has a defined meaning in Section 2(37) — loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing it is legally entitled — and Section 2(38) adds that a person loses wrongfully when he is wrongfully kept out of property as well as when he is wrongfully deprived of it. Section 2 does not define “damage”; this page uses the word in its everyday sense. Section 2(27) says that “public” includes any class of the public or any community, and Section 2(26) says that “person” includes any company or association or body of persons, whether incorporated or not.
The second part is a physical result: the offender “causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously”. The property therefore need not be wholly destroyed. A change that lowers its value, lowers its usefulness, or affects it injuriously is enough, and the change may be to the property itself or only to where it is (its “situation”). Section 2 defines only “movable property” (clause 2(21)). Sub-section (1) says “any property” and does not itself limit the word to movable property.
The two statutory Explanations clarify two points. Explanation 1 says it is not essential that the offender intend loss or damage to the owner of the property: it is sufficient if he intends, or knows he is likely, to cause wrongful loss or damage to any person by injuring any property, whether it belongs to that person or not. Explanation 2 says mischief may be committed by an act affecting property belonging to the person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly. Mischief also differs from theft (Section 303(1)), which needs an intention to take movable property dishonestly out of another’s possession without consent, and a moving of that property for the purpose; mischief needs no taking. Sub-section (1) itself prescribes no punishment. That comes from sub-sections (2) to (6), or from Sections 325 to 327 where the mischief has the features those sections describe.
Sub-section (2) reads “Whoever commits mischief shall be punished ...”, so it fixes the base punishment for the offence defined in sub-section (1): imprisonment of either description for up to six months, or fine, or both. Under Section 4(c) of this Sanhita, imprisonment of either description means either rigorous imprisonment (with hard labour) or simple imprisonment. The sub-section states no minimum term and no maximum amount of fine. Sub-sections (3) to (6) then attach different punishments to mischief that has further features: loss or damage to any property including Government or Local Authority property, the amount of loss or damage caused, or preparation for causing death, hurt or wrongful restraint. The text does not spell out in words how sub-section (2) is to be read alongside the wide wording of sub-section (3), which speaks of loss or damage to “any property”; the tiers are simply set out as separate sub-sections with separate punishments.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS this tier is non-cognizable (in the Schedule’s words, a police officer shall not arrest without warrant), bailable, and triable by any Magistrate. BNSS Section 359(1) lists it as compoundable, without the Court’s permission, by the person to whom the loss or damage is caused, where the only loss or damage is to a private person. Compared with IPC Section 426, the maximum term has risen from three months to six months; the type of punishment (imprisonment of either description, or fine, or both) is unchanged.
Sub-section (3) applies where the offender commits mischief “and thereby causes loss or damage to any property including the property of Government or Local Authority”. The punishment is imprisonment of either description for up to one year, or fine, or both — twice the six-month ceiling of sub-section (2). “Government” means the Central Government or a State Government (Section 2(12)). “Local Authority” is not defined as a stand-alone term in Section 2; clause 2(28)(k)(ii) uses the phrase “local authority” inside the definition of “public servant”, by reference to the General Clauses Act, 1897, for the purposes of that clause. The words of sub-section (3) are “any property including the property of Government or Local Authority”, so the text names Government and Local Authority property as included within “any property” rather than as the only property covered.
This sub-section has no counterpart in the old IPC: the concordance shows it as a new sub-section. Under the First Schedule to the BNSS it is non-cognizable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate. It appears in neither compounding table of BNSS Section 359, so, unlike sub-sections (2) and (4), it is not compoundable.
Sub-section (4) grades mischief by the amount of loss or damage it causes: “to the amount of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees”. The measure in the text is the amount of the loss or damage caused; the sub-section does not speak of the value of the property. The punishment is imprisonment of either description for up to two years, or fine, or both. Under IPC Section 427 the same two-year ceiling applied to loss or damage of fifty rupees or upwards; BNS 324(4) keeps the two-year ceiling but raises the lower threshold to twenty thousand rupees and adds an upper limit of one lakh rupees, above which sub-section (5) applies.
One printed difference should be noted. The First Schedule to the BNSS describes this row as mischief causing loss or damage of twenty thousand rupees “but less than 2 lakh rupees”, whereas the text of the Sanhita reads “less than one lakh rupees” (and sub-section (5) begins at one lakh rupees). The two printed texts differ, and this page follows the text of the Sanhita, quoted above. The classification itself is taken from the Schedule row for this sub-section: non-cognizable, bailable, triable by any Magistrate. BNSS Section 359(1) lists sub-section (4) as compoundable without the Court’s permission by the person to whom the loss or damage is caused, where the only loss or damage is to a private person.
Sub-section (5) picks up where sub-section (4) stops: mischief causing loss or damage “to the amount of one lakh rupees or upwards”, with no upper limit. The punishment is imprisonment of either description for up to five years, or fine, or both — a ceiling two and a half times the two-year ceiling in sub-section (4). This tier is new. The old IPC had no band above the single fifty-rupee threshold in Section 427, whose two-year ceiling applied to loss or damage of “fifty rupees or upwards” however large the amount; the concordance shows sub-section (5) as a new sub-section.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS this tier is cognizable (in the Schedule’s words, a police officer may arrest without warrant), bailable, and triable by a Magistrate of the first class. It appears in neither compounding table of BNSS Section 359, so it is not compoundable — a contrast with sub-sections (2) and (4).
Sub-section (6) is not measured by loss or by the kind of property. It targets mischief committed by a person who has already prepared to injure or restrain someone. The words are “having made preparation for causing to any person death, or hurt, or wrongful restraint, or fear of death, or of hurt, or of wrongful restraint”. Two things must therefore be shown: that the offender committed mischief as defined in sub-section (1), and that he had made preparation for one of the listed consequences to any person. The preparation need not be directed at the owner of the property damaged; the text says “any person”. “Hurt” is defined in Section 114 (causing bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person) and “wrongful restraint” in Section 126(1) (voluntarily obstructing a person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in a direction in which he has a right to proceed). Section 2 does not define “preparation” or “fear of death, or of hurt”; this page uses those words in their everyday sense.
The punishment is imprisonment of either description for up to five years, “and shall also be liable to fine” — so, unlike sub-sections (2) to (5), fine is not offered as an alternative to imprisonment. Under the First Schedule to the BNSS the offence is cognizable, bailable and triable by a Magistrate of the first class, and it is not compoundable. It follows IPC Section 440, with one wording difference: the BNS text reads “or of hurt” where the IPC reads “or hurt”.
These judgment(s) relate to Section 324 as a whole rather than to one specific sub-section, and so are presented together here rather than alongside a particular clause above.
Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) had supplied fuel to an airline, NEPC India, and had a right to possess the airline’s hypothecated aircraft as security for what it was owed. It alleged that NEPC removed engines from those aircraft, reducing their value and utility, and filed criminal complaints, including one for mischief. The High Court quashed the complaints.
The Supreme Court set aside the quashing so far as mischief (old Section 425, now Section 324) and cheating were concerned. It set out the three ingredients of mischief quoted above and held that ownership or possession of the property is not relevant: even if the property belongs to the accused, mischief is committed if the ingredients are made out. The allegation that NEPC removed the engines, diminishing the aircraft’s value and utility and causing loss to IOC, which had the right to possess the whole aircraft, clearly constituted the offence, and the Court was not concerned at that stage with proof or the ultimate decision.
It depends on the sub-section. Basic mischief under sub-section (2) is punishable with imprisonment of either description for up to six months, or fine, or both. Sub-section (3) (loss or damage to any property including Government or Local Authority property) carries up to one year; sub-section (4) (loss or damage of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees) up to two years; sub-section (5) (one lakh rupees or upwards) up to five years; and sub-section (6) (mischief after preparation for causing death, hurt or wrongful restraint) up to five years and fine. In sub-sections (2) to (5) the sentence may be imprisonment, or fine, or both; in sub-section (6) the offender is also liable to fine.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS every tier of Section 324 that carries a classification is bailable. Sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) are non-cognizable and triable by any Magistrate; sub-sections (5) and (6) are cognizable and triable by a Magistrate of the first class.
Only in part. BNSS Section 359(1) lists sub-sections (2) and (4) of Section 324 as compoundable without the court’s permission by the person to whom the loss or damage is caused, where the only loss or damage is to a private person. Sub-sections (3), (5) and (6) do not appear in either compounding table of BNSS Section 359, so they are not compoundable.
No. Explanation 2 to sub-section (1) says that mischief may be committed by an act affecting property belonging to the person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly. Explanation 1 adds that the offender need not intend loss or damage to the owner of the property: it is enough if he intends, or knows it is likely, that wrongful loss or damage will be caused to any person by injuring the property, whether it belongs to that person or not.
No. Sub-section (1) covers the destruction of any property, but also any change in the property or in its situation that destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously. A change that only lowers the value or usefulness of the property is within the words of the definition.
Theft (Section 303(1)) is about intending to take movable property dishonestly out of someone’s possession without their consent, and moving it for that purpose. Mischief under Section 324(1) is about causing wrongful loss or damage by destroying property or changing it injuriously; nothing has to be taken or moved.
Sub-section (1) has the same wording as IPC 425, apart from print differences. The ceiling for basic mischief rises from three months (IPC 426) to six months, the fifty-rupee threshold of IPC 427 is replaced by an amount band of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees, and two new tiers appear: one for loss or damage to any property including Government or Local Authority property (sub-section (3)) and one for loss or damage of one lakh rupees or upwards (sub-section (5)). Sub-section (6) follows IPC 440, with the word “of” added before “hurt”.