House-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment for life
Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment for life. Whoever commits house-trespass in order to the committing of any offence punishable with [imprisonment for life], shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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 commits house-trespass in order to the committing of any offence punishable with [imprisonment for life], shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 450, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 332 House-trespass in order to commit offence Text carried over almost unchanged 86%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
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.
-
Munna vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the testimony of a prosecutrix in a sexual assault case deserves significant weight and can be the basis for conviction even without corroboration, such conviction cannot be sustained when the prosecutrix's statement has inherent infirmities and the totality of circumstances creates doubt about the veracity of the prosecution version. The presence of major discrepancies between initial allegations and trial version, the victim's own subsequent retraction, complete absence of medical or physical corroborative evidence, internal contradictions in the victim's testimony, and evidence of motive for false accusation collectively create a situation where the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
On this section: House breaking with intent to commit offense; conviction under this section was also set aside due to evidentiary infirmities
-
Sukhraj Singh vs Sanjiv Kumar @ Gora
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The conviction of Sanjiv Kumar under Sections 395, 450, and 342 IPC is legally sustainable as it is supported by credible prosecution evidence including eyewitness testimony, documentary evidence, and investigative findings; the separate acquittal or relief granted to a co-offender in a different proceeding does not invalidate the conviction of another accused if the evidence against that accused is independently reliable and credible; sentencing for criminal offences must balance the need for just punishment with proportionality between the offence and penalty, considering the impact on society and the victim, and mere passage of time since the incident without exceptional circumstances does not warrant further sentence reduction beyond what the trial and appellate courts have determined.
On this section: Criminal trespass to commit dacoity - conviction upheld for trespass into premises of Wadhawan Forex for committing robbery
-
Subash Chander vs Krishan Lal
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases where evidence conclusively establishes guilt of accused for heinous crimes like murder of a sleeping family by persons previously involved in witness elimination, and where the High Court has exercised its discretion to commute death sentence to life imprisonment based on general conspectus of facts, the Supreme Court should not interfere with such discretion merely because a 'rarest of rare case' standard might be met. However, where there exists imminent danger to surviving family members from a desperate criminal and where the accused himself voluntarily undertakes on instructions that he shall never seek premature release or commutation, the court can impose an exceptional condition making the life sentence truly a natural life sentence from which no relief can be granted under any statute or jail rules. Life imprisonment in Indian law means imprisonment for the entire natural life of the convicted person unless commuted by the appropriate Government, and it does not automatically expire at the end of any specific period including 20 years.
On this section: Criminal trespass; applied for the unauthorized entry into the house
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Singh (Accused No.1), Ram Nandan Singh (Accused No.2), Raj Nandan Singh (Accused No.3), Shyam Nandan Singh (Accused No.4), Bhagwan Singh (Accused No. 5), Vijay Singh (Accused No. 6) and Tanik Singh (Accused No.7). 2. The Trial Court charged all seven accused persons for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 302, 364, 449, 450, 380/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860[2]( page-1-1) . Later, accused nos. 6 and 7 were distinctly charged for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 342, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. After trial, the Trial Court, vide order dated 05.06.1992, convicted the accused persons listed as …
-
… Pratheep Kumar, J This is an appeal filed by the accused in Sessions Case No.349/2017 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Offences under POCSO Act and Children's Court (Additional Sessions Court-I) Kalpetta, Wayanad against the judgment finding him guilty under Sections 450, 376 (2) (f), (2) (i) and (2) (n) of Indian Penal Code and also under Section 5(l), (m) and (n) r/w Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenes Act 2012 (POCSO Act). 2. The victim in this case is a nine year old girl child and the accused is the husband of the maternal aunt of her mother aged 65 …
Questions about Section 450
What have the courts held on Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code?
Munna vs State of M. P (16 Sep 2014) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: House breaking with intent to commit offense; conviction under this section was also set aside due to evidentiary infirmities. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2001 to 2015.
How do I find court cases under Section 450 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 450, section 450 IPC, section 450 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 450 in bns and ipc 450 punishment in hindi. 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 Munna vs State of M. P (16 Sep 2014).
What should I read with Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 332 (House-trespass in order to commit offence), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 450, 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.