Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment
Section 454 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment. Whoever commits lurking house- trespass or house-breaking, in order to the committing of any offence punishable with imprisonment, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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 lurking house- trespass or house-breaking, in order to the committing of any offence punishable with imprisonment, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and
shall also be liable to fine; and if the offence intended to be committed is theft, the term of the imprisonment may be extended to ten years.
Section 454, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 331 Punishment for house-trespass or house-breaking Close, with changes 83%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Referred to by 8
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 220 Trial for more than one offence
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 260 Power to try summarily
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 220 Trial for more than one offence
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 260 Power to try summarily
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 220 Trial for more than one offence
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 260 Power to try summarily
- Crpc 1973 s. 220 Trial for more than one offence
- Crpc 1973 s. 260 Power to try summarily
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.
-
Adi Malik vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A magistrate cannot record a plea of guilt and convict an accused under Section 241 Cr.P.C. without first complying with the mandatory procedural requirements of Sections 239 and 240 Cr.P.C., which require the magistrate to consider the police report and material and form an opinion that charges should be framed. Failure to comply with these provisions, particularly when coupled with the absence of legal representation for the accused, constitutes a failure of justice that cannot be cured under Section 464 Cr.P.C., and necessitates quashing of the conviction and remittal for fresh proceedings.
On this section: Offences of house-breaking, theft, and common intention - charges against the petitioner
-
Roshan Ali @ Sonu vs State of Chhattisgarh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an applicant in a criminal revision petition has already served a substantial portion of the imposed sentence and has faced prolonged criminal trial spanning more than a decade, the High Court may exercise its discretionary power to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone if it finds that such time served is sufficient to meet the ends of justice, particularly considering the applicant's age, rehabilitation potential, and the absence of any useful purpose in further incarceration.
On this section: House trespass in daytime - substituted by appellate court in place of Section 457
-
Syed Sarjil Sayyad Harun vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When eyewitness testimony fails to corroborate the involvement of an accused in a criminal act, and material investigation is complete, bail may be granted if the evidence creates reasonable doubt about the accused's participation in the alleged crime, particularly where the absence of identification evidence is significant.
On this section: House-breaking - applicable to the alleged unauthorized entry into a dwelling
-
Kiran Multanmal Jain vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where the main accused in a theft case makes a disclosure statement implicating a third party as the recipient of stolen goods, and the accused reiterates this statement during recovery proceedings, and the third party does not cooperate with police during investigation, the trial court has sufficient grounds to frame charges against the third party under Sections 454, 457, 380, and 311 IPC, even if no stolen goods are recovered from the third party's premises. The High Court will not interfere with such an order under Article 227 of the Constitution in the exercise of its limited jurisdiction.
On this section: Charge of lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with life imprisonment or 7 or more years imprisonment
-
Sahbddin vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An accused with significant criminal antecedents, including involvement in multiple criminal cases and prior convictions, is not entitled to bail as such antecedents demonstrate a pattern of criminal behavior and make the accused unsuitable for release on bail.
On this section: Sections 454 (Lurking House-trespass or House-breaking) and 480 (Theft or Mischief by Person Bound by Oath or Legal Obligation) were the offences charged against the petitioner for theft of gold and silver ornaments.
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.
-
… Date of Judgment : January 10, 2017. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Shri Sandeep Garssa for the appellant. Shri R.R. Baisla, P.P. for the State. 1. Appellant had faced trial in FIR No. 179/2008 registered at Police Station Jalupura, District Jaipur City (South), under Section 394, 398, 454 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') . 2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that three persons had come to the house of the complainant on 27.11.2008 at about 10.30 a.m. Complainant showed artificial diamonds to them. Wife of the complainant went to bring water for them. In the meantime one …
-
… Date of Judgment : January 10, 2017. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Shri Harendra Singh for the appellant. Shri R.R. Baisla, P.P. for the State. 1. Appellant had faced trial in FIR No. 179/2008 registered at Police Station Jalupura, District Jaipur City (South), under Section 394, 398, 454 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') . 2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that three persons had come to the house of the complainant on 27.11.2008 at about 10.30 a.m. Complainant showed artificial diamonds to them. Wife of the complainant went to bring water for them. In the meantime one …
Questions about Section 454
What have the courts held on Section 454 of the Indian Penal Code?
Adi Malik vs State (24 Apr 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Offences of house-breaking, theft, and common intention - charges against the petitioner. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2016 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 454 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 454, section 454 IPC, section 454 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 454 380 and ipc 454 in bns. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Adi Malik vs State (24 Apr 2019).
What should I read with Section 454 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
8 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 331 (Punishment for house-trespass or house-breaking), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 454 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 454 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 454, 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.