Theft in dwelling house, etc
IPC 380 (Theft in dwelling house, etc) corresponds most closely to BNS 305, Theft in a dwelling house, or means of transportation or place of worship, etc, on a text comparison scoring 83 per cent. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed with effect from 01 Jul 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Repealed · Indian Penal Code
Section 380 Theft in dwelling house, etc
Whoever commits theft in any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or used for the custody of property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
In force · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Section 305 Theft in a dwelling house, or means of transportation or place of worship, etc
Whoever commits theft—
(a) in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or used for the custody of property; or
(b) of any means of transport used for the transport of goods or passengers; or
(c) of any article or goods from any means of transport used for the transport of goods or passengers; or
(d) of idol or icon in any place of worship; or
(e) of any property of the Government or of a local authority,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Other provisions with similar text
The next closest matches, in order. Where a provision was split or merged, the answer is often more than one of these.
How this table was made, and what it is not
There is no official machine-readable correspondence between the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Ministry published comparison charts for human readers; nothing exists that a computer can check. So this is not an official mapping and we do not present it as one.
What it measures is how alike the text of two provisions is. For each provision of the old enactment we compare its words against every provision of the new one and report the closest, with the score. That works here because the new codes are largely a renumbering rather than a rewrite: where a provision carried over near-verbatim the match is self-evidencing, and you can see it for yourself, because both texts are set out side by side on every entry.
Where the law genuinely changed, the score falls and the entry says no close match found rather than offering a guess. Those entries matter: they are where the reform actually did something.
Check before you cite. A high score means the words are alike, not that a court has held the provisions equivalent. For that, read both texts and the Gazette.
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. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.