Indian criminal law | Updated October 2026

Section 378 IPC: Theft Definition, Explanations and Current BNS Law

Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 defined theft. Since 1 July 2024, Section 303 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) defines theft and specifies its punishment for offences governed by the new law.

What is theft under Section 378 IPC?

The statutory definition provides that whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property in order to such taking, commits theft.

The corresponding current definition is in Section 303(1) BNS. Under the IPC, punishment was separately provided by Section 379 IPC.

Essential ingredients of theft

1. Dishonest intention: An intention to cause wrongful gain or wrongful loss as understood under the applicable penal law.
2. Movable property: The property must be capable of being moved; attached things can become movable when severed.
3. Possession: The property must be taken out of another person's possession.
4. Absence of consent: Neither express nor implied consent authorises the taking.
5. Movement: The accused moves the property in order to take it; removal over a substantial distance is not essential.

Five statutory explanations to Section 378 IPC

1. Explanation 1.-A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being movable property, is not the subject of theft; but it becomes capable of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.
2. Explanation 2.-A moving effected by the same act which effects the severance may be a theft.
3. Explanation 3.-A person is said to cause a thing to move by removing an obstacle which prevented it from moving or by separating it from any other thing, as well as by actually moving it.
4. Explanation 4.-A person, who by any means causes an animal to move, is said to move that animal, and to move everything which, in consequence of the motion so caused, is moved by that animal.
5. Explanation 5.-The consent mentioned in the definition may be express or implied, and may be given either by the person in possession, or by any person having for that purpose authority either express or implied.

All sixteen statutory illustrations (a) to (p)

The original examples below are retained to explain how dishonest intention, possession, movement and consent operate in practice.

1. A cuts down a tree on Z's ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of Z's possession without Z's consent. Here, as soon as A has severed the tree in order to such taking, he has committed theft.
2. A puts a bait for dogs in his pocket, and thus induces Z's dog to follow it. Here, if A's intention be dishonestly to take the dog out of Z's possession without Z's consent, A has committed theft as soon as Z's dog has begun to follow A.
3. A meets a bullock carrying a box of treasure. He drives the bullock in a certain direction, in order that he may dishonestly take the treasure. As soon as the bullock begins to move, A has committed theft of the treasure.
4. A being Z's servant, and entrusted by Z with the care of Z's plate, dishonestly runs away with the plate, without Z's consent. A has committed theft.
5. Z, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of a warehouse, till Z shall return. A carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it. Here the plate was not in Z's possession. It could not therefore be taken out of Z's possession, and A has not committed theft, though he may have committed criminal breach of trust.
6. A finds a ring belonging to Z on a table in the house which Z occupies. Here the ring is in Z's possession, and if A dishonestly removes it, A commits theft.
7. A finds a ring lying on the highroad, not in the possession of any person. A, by taking it, commits no theft, though he may commit criminal misappropriation of property.
8. A sees a ring belonging to Z lying on a table in Z's house. Not venturing to misappropriate the ring immediately for fear of search and detection, A hides the ring in a place where it is highly improbable that it will ever be found by Z, with the intention of taking the ring from the hiding place and selling it when the loss is forgotten. Here A, at the time of first moving the ring, commits theft.
9. A delivers his watch to Z, a jeweller, to be regulated. Z carries it to his shop. A, not owing to the jeweller any debt for which the jeweller might lawfully detain the watch as a security, enters the shop openly, takes his watch by force out of Z's hand, and carries it away. Here A, though he may have committed criminal trespass and assault, has not committed theft, inasmuch as what he did was not done dishonestly.
10. If A owes money to Z for repairing the watch, and if Z retains the watch lawfully as a security for the debt, and A takes the watch out of Z's possession, with the intention of depriving Z of the property as a security for his debt, he commits theft, inasmuch as he takes it dishonestly.
11. Again, if A, having pawned his watch to Z, takes it out of Z's possession without Z's consent, not having paid what he borrowed on the watch, he commits theft, though the watch is his own property inasmuch as he takes it dishonestly.
12. A takes an article belonging to Z out of Z's possession without Z's consent, with the intention of keeping it until he obtains money from Z as a reward for its restoration. Here A takes dishonestly; A has therefor committed theft.
13. A, being on friendly terms with Z, goes into Z's library in Z's absence, and takes away a book without Z's express consent for the purpose merely of reading it, and with the intention of returning it. Here, it is probable that A may have conceived that he had Z's implied consent to use Z's book. If this was A's impression, A has not committed theft.
14. A asks charity from Z's wife. She gives A money, food and clothes, which A knows to belong to Z her husband. Here it is probable that A may conceive that Z's wife is authorised to give away alms. If this was A's impression, A has not committed theft.
15. A is the paramour of Z's wife. She gives a valuable property, which A knows to belong to her husband Z, and to be such property as she has not authority from Z to give. If A takes the property dishonestly, he commits theft.
16. A, in good faith, believing property belonging to Z to be A's own property, takes that property out of B's possession. Here, as A does not take dishonestly, he does not commit theft.

Punishment for theft: IPC and BNS comparison

Related theft offences under the BNS

Section 304 BNS: Snatching, involving sudden, quick or forcible taking of movable property from a person or possession, is separately punishable with imprisonment up to three years and fine. Section 305 BNS: Addresses theft in a dwelling house, means of transportation, place of worship and specified public property, with imprisonment up to seven years and fine. Other specialised theft provisions may apply depending on the facts.

Frequently asked questions

Is Section 378 IPC still applicable?

It remains relevant to offences committed before 1 July 2024, subject to repeal and savings provisions. For offences governed by the BNS, Section 303 is the corresponding provision.

Can taking one's own property amount to theft?

Yes, in certain circumstances. If another person lawfully possesses it as security, dishonestly removing it without consent may amount to theft. See illustrations (j) and (k).

Is simply finding lost property theft?

Not necessarily. Illustration (g) distinguishes taking property not in anyone's possession from theft, while warning that criminal misappropriation may arise depending on the circumstances.

Official legislation and further reading

Read the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on India Code and the official BNS text (PDF). The National Crime Records Bureau also publishes a BNS section reference.

This article is for general legal information. Classification, procedure, punishment and applicable provisions should be checked against the facts, commencement dates and current legislation.