Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVII: Of Offences against Property · Of criminal trespass
Section 452: House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever commits house-trespass, having made preparation for causing hurt to any person or for assaulting any person, or for wrongfully restraining any person, or for putting and person in fear of hurt, or of assault, or of wrongful restraint, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 452
-
State of Rajasthan v. Parmeshwar Ramlal Joshi and Others
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in reviewing its earlier orders while exercising jurisdiction u/s.528 BNSS [s.482 CrPC]
-
Shiv Baran v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court quashing the summons issued against respondent u/s.319 CrPC by the trial court.
-
Ramyash @ Lal Bahadur v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Etc. Etc
Whether the High Court erred in allowing the Correction Application filed under Section 362, CrPC by the accused persons and modifying its earlier judgment by converting the conviction under Section 302 to Section 304…
-
The State of Himachal Pradesh v. Rajesh Kumar @ Munnu
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused u/ss.376 and 452 IPC.
-
Rinku Baheti v. Sandesh Sharda
Issue arose whether the petitioner-wife is entitled to the transfer of the divorce petition; and whether this Court, upon the application filed by the respondent-husband, can exercise its powers u/Art. 142(1) of the…
-
Gurmeet Kaur v. Devender Gupta & Another
Issue arose whether the appellant while discharging her duty as a public servant on the relevant date, there was any excess in the discharge of the said duty which did not require the first respondent to take a prior…
-
Sonu Choudary v. State of NCT Delhi
Issue arose as to whether the conviction of the appellant u/ss.324 and 452 IPC is sustainable; and whether a restaurant can be said to be a place used for dwelling or for worship or for the custody of property for…
-
Ajwar v. Waseem and Another
High Court, if justified in exercising jurisdiction u/s. 439(1) Cr.P.C for granting regular bail in favour of the accused persons.
-
N. Manogar & Anr. v. The Inspector of Police & Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the order passed by the trial court whereunder, the trial court rejected the application filed by the complainant u/s. 216/319 CrPC seeking the summoning of, and the…
-
State of Haryana v. Mohd. Yunus & Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in convicting A1 only u/s. 323 while acquitting u/s. 302/34, and convicting and sentencing A2 u/s. 302 and 323 read with s. 34; and whether in trial u/s. 302 IPC, it is safe to…
-
Sivamani v. State Represented by Inspector of Police,
Victims sustained simple injuries. Whether Courts below were justified in convicting appellants u/s. 307 IPC.
-
Madan v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Six deaths were caused on account of brutal firing by the appellants and other accused persons. The trial court imposed sentence of capital punishment to the appellants (‘M’ and ‘S’) herein for the offence punishable…
-
Parshuram v. State of M.P.
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offences punishable u/s. 302/149, s.326/149, s.324/149, s.323/149, s.147 and s.148 IPC.
- Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab
- Raj Kumar @ Suman v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- Central Bureau of Investigation v. Aryan Singh Etc.
- Jabir & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
- Zakia Ahsan Jafri v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
- State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Chetan Jeff
- Jafarudheen & Ors. v. State of Kerala
- Ramveer Upadhyay & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Geeta Devi v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- State of Rajasthan v. Bablu @ Om Prakash
- Shantaben Bhurabhai Bhuriya v. Anand Athabhai Chaudhari & Ors.
- Naser Bin Abu Bakr Yafai v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur v. Akashdeep Morya & Anr.
- Rahmat Khan @ Rammu Bismillah v. Deputy Commissioner of Police
- Harjit Singh v. Inderpreet Singh @ Inder and Another
- Achhar Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Ajay Kumar @ Bittu & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
- Hitesh Verma v. The State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
- Bikramjit Singh v. The State of Punjab
- Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Anr. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Ramji Singh & Ors. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Udham and Others
- P Ramesh v. State Rep by Inspector of Police
- Naval Kishore Mishra v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- Atma Ram & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
- Harveer Singh & Anr. v. State of U.P.
- State of Maharashtra v. Shankar Ganapati Rahatol & Ors.
- Asharfi v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Ahsan v. State of U.P.
- Raj Talreja v. Kavita Talreja
- Vineet Kumar & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Manju Devi v. Onkarjit Singh Ahluwalia @ Omkarjeet Singh & Others
- Pankaj v. State of Rajasthan
- Anil@ Bawa v. State of Haryana
- Bimla Devi v. Rajesh Singh &Anr.
- State of Maharashtra v. Ramlal Devappa Rathod and Others
- Raj Singh v. State of Haryana Etc.
- Ved Mitier Gill v. Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh and Others