Force
Section 349 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with force. A person is said to use force to another if he causes motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion to that other, or if he causes to any substance such motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion as brings that substance into contact with any part of that other's body, or with anything w 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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.
A person is said to use force to another if he causes motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion to that other, or if he causes to any substance such motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion as brings that substance into contact with any part of that other's body, or with anything which that other is wearing or carrying, or with anything so situated that such contact affects that other's sense of feeling:
Provided that the person causing the motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion, causes that motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion in one of the three ways hereinafter described:
First.-By his own bodily power.
Secondly.-By disposing any substance in such a manner that the motion or change or cessation of motion takes place without any further act on his part, or on the part of any other person.
Thirdly.-By inducing any animal to move, to change its motion, or to cease to move.
Section 349, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 128 Force 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
State vs Salman Khan& ORS.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Damage caused to wildlife, even if not calculable in monetary terms, constitutes loss to ecology and society at large. Therefore, provisions of Chapter VIII of the Indian Penal Code, specifically Section 149 IPC read with Section 141 IPC (Clause Thirdly covering 'other offence'), can be applied to offences under the Wildlife Protection Act when committed by an unlawful assembly. However, Sections 147 and 148 IPC (rioting and rioting with deadly weapons) cannot be applied to wildlife hunting as they require use of criminal force against persons, not animals. Criminal force under Section 349 IPC is limited to force causing motion or change of motion in another person.
On this section: Definition of criminal force - Court examined this definition to determine whether force used on animals constitutes criminal force; held that force on animals is not criminal force unless it affects another person
-
State vs Dushyant Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The provisions of Sections 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code can be applied to offences under the Wildlife Protection Act to the extent that: (1) Section 147 (rioting) and Section 148 (rioting with deadly weapons) cannot apply because criminal force as defined in Section 349 IPC requires use of force on another person, not on animals; (2) Section 149 (act of member of unlawful assembly) can apply when an unlawful assembly is formed with the common object of committing mischief against wildlife, as 'mischief' under Section 425 IPC includes damage to wildlife which constitutes loss to ecology and public; (3) The definition of 'offence' under Section 40 IPC extends to special laws like the Wildlife Protection Act for purposes of Section 141 IPC (unlawful assembly), particularly Clause Thirdly which covers 'other offence'; (4) Damage to wildlife, even if not calculable in monetary terms, constitutes loss to the public and society, bringing it within the definition of mischief.
On this section: Definition of criminal force - Court analyzed that force must be used on another person, not on animals
-
State vs Saif Ali
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The provisions of Chapter VIII of the Indian Penal Code, specifically Sections 147, 148, and 149 IPC, can be applied to offences under special laws like the Wildlife Protection Act, but only to the extent that the underlying offence falls within the scope of the specific IPC provision. Section 149 IPC can be applied to wildlife protection violations when committed by an unlawful assembly because hunting protected animals constitutes 'mischief' under Section 425 IPC, which falls within Clause Thirdly of Section 141 IPC's definition of unlawful assembly. However, Section 147 IPC (rioting) cannot be applied to wildlife hunting because rioting requires use of criminal force on persons, not animals. The definition of 'offence' under Section 40 IPC extends to special laws when the offence is punishable with imprisonment of six months or more, and damage to wildlife constitutes loss to the public through ecological harm, thereby satisfying the mischief definition.
On this section: Definition of criminal force - Court analyzed that force must be used on persons to cause motion/change of motion, not on animals or things
-
State vs Neelam Kothari
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Damage caused to wildlife, even if not evaluable in monetary terms, constitutes loss to public ecology and society at large. Therefore, the provisions of Section 141 IPC (unlawful assembly) can be applied to offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, and consequently, Section 149 IPC (act of any member of unlawful assembly) applies to wildlife hunting offences when multiple persons act with common object to commit mischief. However, Sections 147 and 148 IPC (rioting and rioting with deadly weapons) do not apply to wildlife hunting as they require criminal force affecting persons, not animals.
On this section: Definition of criminal force - Court held criminal force applies only between persons, not to animals unless affecting another person
-
Renjith vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where the essential ingredients of an offence, namely assault or criminal force as defined in Sections 350 and 351 IPC, are not made out from the allegations in the charge sheet, and the prosecution case contains material factual discrepancies (such as misidentification of the vehicle type), the High Court may exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings as an abuse of the process of court, even if the case is pending in the lower court.
On this section: Definition of force - cited to understand the foundational concept underlying criminal force
-
Arun Paswan vs State of Bihar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An appeal against an order directing the registration of contempt proceedings is premature and not maintainable when filed before the contempt proceedings are concluded. The appellate court cannot adjudicate on the merits of such an order at an intermediate stage; the proper course is to await the final outcome of the contempt proceedings and then appeal if aggrieved.
On this section: Referenced in the order as the basis for initiating contempt proceedings; the court noted that proceeding under Section 349 IPC was directed to be registered
-
Jagdeep @ Dhankhar vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When material witnesses fail to support the prosecution case during trial and co-accused have been granted bail by a coordinate bench, bail may be granted to an accused charged with serious offences, particularly after prolonged custody, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
On this section: Charge of wrongful restraint against the petitioner; one of the primary offences for which bail was sought
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 349
What have the courts held on Section 349 of the Indian Penal Code?
State vs Salman Khan& ORS. (24 Jul 2012) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Definition of criminal force - Court examined this definition to determine whether force used on animals constitutes criminal force; held that force on animals is not criminal force unless it affects another person. Another 6 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2012 to 2021.
How do I find court cases under Section 349 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 349, section 349 IPC, section 349 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 349 is bailable or not and ipc 349 in bns. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 7 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with State vs Salman Khan& ORS. (24 Jul 2012).
What should I read with Section 349 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 128 (Force), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 349 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 349 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 349, 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.