Indian criminal law | Updated 31 October 2026
IPC Section 429 and BNS Section 325: Mischief by Killing or Maiming Animals
Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, punished mischief involving the killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless of specified cattle and other animals. The corresponding current provision is Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 429 IPC: Original statutory text
429. Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.
Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, or any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.
The older section applied regardless of value to an elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox. It also applied to other animals worth at least fifty rupees. Its maximum punishment was five years of imprisonment, or fine, or both.
Section 325 BNS: Current law and punishment
Section 325 BNS is titled Mischief by killing or maiming animal. It penalises committing mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless any animal. The prescribed punishment is imprisonment of either description for a term extending to five years, or fine, or both.
The BNS provision applies to any animal without the former monetary threshold. The prosecution must still establish the necessary elements of mischief under Section 324(1) BNS, including the requisite intention or knowledge concerning wrongful loss or damage.
Read the official Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (India Code PDF) for the exact wording of Sections 324 and 325.
Essential ingredients
- Animal affected: An animal is killed, poisoned, maimed or rendered useless.
- Act amounting to mischief: The conduct causes destruction or an injurious change affecting the value or utility of property, within the statutory definition.
- Criminal state of mind: The accused intended, or knew it was likely, to cause wrongful loss or damage to the public or a person.
- Proof and connection: Evidence must connect the alleged conduct and its consequences to the accused; mere suspicion is insufficient.
Proof may include veterinary examination, post-mortem findings, photographs, eyewitness accounts, CCTV footage, laboratory reports and evidence concerning ownership or custody. The relevance and admissibility of each item depend on the case.
IPC Section 428, IPC Section 429 and BNS Section 325 compared
| Provision | Animals covered | Maximum punishment |
|---|---|---|
| IPC Section 428 | Animal or animals valued at Rs. 10 or more | 2 years, or fine, or both |
| IPC Section 429 | Named cattle and other specified animals irrespective of value; other animals valued at Rs. 50 or more | 5 years, or fine, or both |
| BNS Section 325 | Any animal; no minimum value stated | 5 years, or fine, or both |
Practical illustrations
Poisoning cattle: A person deliberately poisons a neighbour's cow to cause wrongful loss. If the elements of mischief are established, Section 325 BNS may apply to conduct governed by the new law.
Injuring a pet: Intentionally maiming a pet animal to cause wrongful loss may fall within Section 325 BNS, even though the animal is not livestock.
Accidental harm: An animal's accidental injury does not automatically establish mischief. The required intention or knowledge, causation and surrounding circumstances must be examined.
Other animal protection laws
Depending on the facts, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 may be relevant, including Section 11, which addresses specified acts of cruelty to animals. Wildlife-related conduct may also engage the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. State laws concerning cattle preservation or slaughter can impose separate requirements. These enactments have distinct ingredients and should not be treated as interchangeable with BNS Section 325.
For statutory texts and amendments, consult the India Code official legislation portal and the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Complaint, investigation and court procedure
A person reporting suspected intentional harm to an animal should promptly preserve evidence, seek veterinary assistance where appropriate and report the incident to the competent authorities. Whether the police can investigate without a Magistrate's order, and whether bail is available as of right, depend on the classification of the actual offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and any other applicable enactments. Check the current BNSS First Schedule rather than assuming the classification of an older IPC section applies unchanged.
Frequently asked questions
What was the punishment under IPC Section 429?
Imprisonment of either description up to five years, or fine, or both.
Which BNS section corresponds to IPC Section 429?
Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, addresses mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering an animal useless.
Does BNS Section 325 require an animal to have a minimum monetary value?
No. Unlike IPC Sections 428 and 429, BNS Section 325 does not prescribe a minimum monetary value for the animal.
Does an accidental injury to an animal automatically constitute mischief?
No. The statutory definition of mischief requires the relevant intention or knowledge concerning wrongful loss or damage; facts and evidence matter.
Can other animal protection laws also apply?
Depending on the facts, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, wildlife legislation or applicable state laws may also be relevant.
Official legal references
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - official text
- India Code - IPC, BNSS and animal protection legislation
- Ministry of Home Affairs
- Supreme Court of India
This article is general legal information. The applicable statute and procedural provisions depend on the date and facts of the alleged offence.