Section355
The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour person, otherwise than on grave provocation

Repealed From 01 Jan 1862 Act 45 of 1860 As on 15 Oct 2026

Act 45 of 1860 Ministry Home Affairs Enacted 06 Oct 1860 In force 01 Jan 1862

This provision is repealed. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024. It is reproduced because conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Section 355 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour person, otherwise than on grave provocation. Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person, intending thereby to dishonour that person, otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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 assaults or uses criminal force to any person, intending thereby to dishonour that person, otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 355, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).

Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

BNS 133 Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour person, otherwise than on grave provocation Text carried over almost unchanged 100%

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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.

  1. Sho of Yadiki Ps vs C. Nagalaksahmi

    Junior Civil Judge Court, Tadipatri 12 Mar 2022 Persuasive (District Court)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    Criminal complaints involving assault or criminal force under Section 355 IPC can be validly settled through Lok Adalat when both parties mutually agree to such resolution, and such settlement constitutes a valid disposal of the criminal case.

    On this section: Section 355 IPC pertains to assault or criminal force not amounting to grievous hurt. The case involves allegations of such conduct by the accused, which formed the basis of the criminal complaint filed by Yadiki Police Station.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  2. Devi Lal vs Virendra Singh Chauhan

    High Court 08 Sep 2010 Persuasive (Other High Court)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    In the absence of any alleged legal infirmity in a summoning order, the High Court will not exercise its discretionary power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings. The accused's grounds of defense and objections to the charges are better addressed before the trial court rather than through premature High Court intervention. The status of the accused as a police officer does not, by itself, provide grounds for quashing the summoning order.

    On this section: The substantive criminal charge of criminal intimidation or assault under which the applicant was accused and summoned to trial.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

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 355

What have the courts held on Section 355 of the Indian Penal Code?

Sho of Yadiki Ps vs C. Nagalaksahmi (12 Mar 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Section 355 IPC pertains to assault or criminal force not amounting to grievous hurt. The case involves allegations of such conduct by the accused, which formed the basis of the criminal complaint filed by Yadiki Police Station. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below. They run from 2010 to 2022.

How do I find court cases under Section 355 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 355, section 355 IPC, section 355 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 355 in bns and ipc 355 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sho of Yadiki Ps vs C. Nagalaksahmi (12 Mar 2022).

What should I read with Section 355 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?

For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 133 (Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour person, otherwise than on grave provocation), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.

When did Section 355 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?

Section 355 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 355, 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

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.