Joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon
Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon. Whoever, being armed with any deadly weapon, or with anything which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, is a member of an unlawful assembly, 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 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Whoever, being armed with any deadly weapon, or with anything which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, is a member of an unlawful assembly, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 144, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 189 Unlawful assembly Close, with changes 80%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Vidhya Rattan vs The State of Haryana Home Department Chief Secretary
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For the application of Section 149 IPC, it is not necessary to explicitly invoke Section 141 IPC in the charge sheet. What is essential is that the ingredients of unlawful assembly as defined in Section 141 IPC must be proven. An unlawful assembly requires: (i) an assembly of at least five persons, and (ii) a common object to commit an offence or achieve any of the objects enumerated in Section 141. The common object is to be gathered from the circumstances of each case such as time, place, and conduct of the gathering. Once the existence of an unlawful assembly with a common object is proven, all members of that assembly are vicariously liable under Section 149 IPC for offences committed in prosecution of that common object, regardless of whether each member inflicted a specific injury or even any injury at all. Mere presence in the unlawful assembly with knowledge of the common object is sufficient for vicarious liability.
On this section: Deals with joining an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon likely to cause death.
-
Jaga @ Santosh Kumar vs State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an appellate court reviews an appeal against acquittal, it must defer substantially to the trial court's assessment of credibility and factual findings unless those findings are palpably wrong or based on erroneous law. A trial court's view that is reasonable and possible, even if an appellate court might take a different view on re-appreciation of evidence, does not justify interference with acquittal. The presumption of innocence in favor of an accused is strengthened by an acquittal from the trial court. A dying declaration recorded indirectly (not in the declarant's actual words but as relayed by a third party) creates inherent suspicion about its credibility, and the prosecution must clear this suspicion to the satisfaction of the court. If a trial court reasonably finds that such credibility is not established, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.
On this section: Unlawful assembly; appellants were charged under this section in relation to the group attack
-
Jagan Shravan Patil vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 34 IPC applies where two or more persons commit a criminal act in furtherance of common intention, requiring that common intention be established through direct or circumstantial evidence though direct proof is seldom available. The acts of persons need not be identical but must be actuated by the same common intention preceding the crime. No overt act is necessary from each accused, and the provision applies even if particular accused caused no injury. When evidence establishes factual matrix showing coordinated action, planning, incitement, use of different weapons, and prevention of intervention by family members in a killing, it suffices to establish common intention for murder under Sections 302 read with 34 IPC.
On this section: Unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon - Applied for armed rioting conviction
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 144
What have the courts held on Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code?
Vidhya Rattan vs The State of Haryana Home Department Chief Secretary (06 Aug 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Deals with joining an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon likely to cause death. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2009 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code?
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: IPC 144, section 144 IPC, section 144 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 144 in bns. 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 Vidhya Rattan vs The State of Haryana Home Department Chief Secretary (06 Aug 2019).
What should I read with Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 189 (Unlawful assembly), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 144, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.