Dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property
Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property. Whoever dishonestly or with intent to commit mischief, breaks open or unfastens any closed receptacle which contains or which he believes to contain property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Whoever dishonestly or with intent to commit mischief, breaks open or unfastens any closed receptacle which contains or which he believes to contain property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Whoever, being entrusted with any closed receptacle which contains or which he believes to contain property, without having authority to open the same, dishonestly, or with intent to commit mischief, breaks open or unfastens that receptacle, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 334, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 461 Dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property Text carried over almost unchanged 97%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
How this offence is classified
From the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which classifies every offence under the Sanhita. Cognizable means a police officer may arrest without warrant; bailable means bail is a matter of right rather than of the court's discretion. This section is classified 2 ways.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dishonestly breaking open or unfastening any closed receptacle containing or supposed to contain property. | Imprisonment for 2 years, or fine, or both. | Cognizable. | Non-bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Being entrusted with any closed receptacle containing or supposed to contain any property, and fraudulently opening the same. | Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Manzoor Ilahi Khan Muhammad Khan vs The State of Maharashtra Thr. City Kotwali Police Station Akola
Decided under Indian Penal Code 461, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The mere presence of civil elements or civil flavour in a dispute does not provide grounds for quashing criminal proceedings. When allegations constitute criminal offences under the Indian Penal Code (such as housebreaking and theft), the criminal process must proceed independently of any civil remedies available to the parties. The court will not quash an FIR merely because the underlying facts involve property rights or civil disputes.
On this section: Offence of housebreaking - applied to the allegation that the petitioner obtained forcible possession of the property
-
Hemant vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Decided under Indian Penal Code 461, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Even where an accused has previously jumped bail, the High Court may exercise its discretionary power under Section 439 CrPC to grant regular bail if the accused has been in custody for a substantial period, provided that bail is granted subject to conditions imposed by the trial court to ensure the accused's appearance in court and compliance with judicial orders.
On this section: Offence of Punishment for Lurking House-trespass or House-breaking; the substantive charge against the petitioner
-
Saroj Singh vs The State of Bihar
Decided under Indian Penal Code 461, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused is charged primarily on the basis of a co-accused's statement and possesses a fair antecedent record, bail may be granted with appropriate conditions including sureties, undertakings regarding court appearance, and safeguards against misuse of bail through involvement in similar offences.
On this section: Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property - charge against petitioner
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 334
What have the courts held on Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Manzoor Ilahi Khan Muhammad Khan vs The State of Maharashtra Thr. City Kotwali Police Station Akola (17 Sep 2018) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 461, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Offence of housebreaking - applied to the allegation that the petitioner obtained forcible possession of the property. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2013 to 2018.
Is Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Non-bailable, on a first conviction, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This section is classified 2 ways; all of them are set out on this page.
Is Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Any Magistrate.
How do I find court cases under Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNS 334, section 334 BNS, section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 334(1) and bns 334(4). Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Manzoor Ilahi Khan Muhammad Khan vs The State of Maharashtra Thr. City Kotwali Police Station Akola (17 Sep 2018).
What should I read with Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward IPC 461 (Dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 334 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 334, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions2199 words
- 356. Defamation1543 words
- 335. Making a false document1318 words
- 101. Murder1177 words
- 303. Theft1104 words
- 3. General explanations858 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.