Welcome to Drishti Judiciary - Powered by Drishti IAS








Home / Indian Penal Code

Criminal Law

Mischief

    «    »
 13-Feb-2024

Introduction

Mischief is an offence which is covered in Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Sections 425 to 440 covers the offence of mischief, punishment, aggravated form of mischief and mischief with preparation of causing death. The offence is dependent on the maxim ‘sic utretuoleadas’ which means that the use your property, but it must not injure any other’s property.

Section 425 of IPC

  • Mischief is defined under Section 425 of IPC.
  • It states whoever with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, commits “mischief”.
  • Explanation 1 —It is not essential to the offence of mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or damage to the owner of the property injured or destroyed. It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to any person by injuring any property, whether it belongs to that person or not.
  • Explanation 2. —Mischief may be committed by an act affecting property belonging to the person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly.
  • Illustrations:
    • A voluntarily burns a valuable security belonging to Z intending to cause wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.
    • A, having joint property with Z in a horse, shoots the horse, intending thereby to cause wrongful loss to Z. A has committed mischief.

Essentials of Mischief

  • Mens Rea – It was held in the matter of Nagendranath Roy v. Dr. Bijoy Kumar Dasburma R (1991) that a mere act of negligence will not suffice to constitute mischief, a corrupt intent must be present.
  • Actus Rea – It was held in the case of Arjuna v. State (1969) causing injury or damage to anyone’s property by diminishing the value of the property will constitute Actus rea of the crime.
  • Change diminishing the value of the entity - The value of that entity must diminish as an aftermath of the Mens rea followed by Actus rea.

Section 426 of IPC

  • Section 426 of IPC deals with the punishment for the offence of mischief.
  • It states that whoever commits mischief shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.

Aggravated forms of Mischief

  • Section 427 to 440 of IPC covers the aggravated form of this offence into which the gravity depends upon the nature of the conduct and value of money involved.
  • Section 427:
    • This Section deals with mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment of maximum of 2 years or fine or both.
    • Mens rea is an essential element.
  • Section 428:
    • It deals with mischief by killing or maiming of animals of the value of ten rupees.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 2 years or fine or both.
  • Section 429:
    • It deals with mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment that may extend to 5 years or fine or both.
  • Section 430:
    • It deals with the mischief by injury to works to irrigation or by wrongfully diverting water.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 5 years or fine or both.
    • Mens rea is an essential element.
  • Section 431:
    • It deals with the mischief caused by injury to the public road, bridge, river or channel.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment that may extend to 5 years or fine or both.
    • Mens rea is an essential element.
  • Section 432:
    • It deals with mischief caused by inundation or obstruction to public drainage attended with damage.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment that may extend to 5 years or fine or both.
  • Section 433:
    • It deals with mischief by destroying, moving or rendering less useful a lighthouse or seamark.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment that may extend to 7 years or a fine or both.
  • Section 434:
    • It deals with mischief by destroying or moving, etc., a landmark fixed by public authority.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment that may extend to 7 years or a fine or both.

Offences of Arson in Mischief

  • Section 435:
    • It deals with the mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment of either description which may extend to 7 years and a fine.
  • Section 436:
    • It deals with the mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy the house.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment of life or imprisonment of either description extendable up to 10 years & fine.
  • Section 437:
    • It deals with mischief with intent to destroy or make unsafe a decked vessel or one of twenty tons burden.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment extendable up to 10 years and fine.
  • Section 438:
    • It deals with mischief under Section 437 by fire explosives.
    • It is punishable with imprisonment of life or imprisonment of either description extendable up to 10 years & fine.
  • Section 439:
    • It deals with intentionally running of vessels aground or ashore to commit theft.
    • It is punishable as per discretion of the court extendable up to 10 years and fine.

Offence of Mischief After Preparation of Causing Death or Hurt

  • Section 440 of IPC deals with the mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt.
  • It states that whoever commits mischief, having made preparation for causing to any person death, or hurt, or wrongful restraint, or fear of death, or of hurt, or of wrongful restraint, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.
  • The offence under this Section is cognizable, non – bailable, compoundable and triable by Magistrate of First Class.

Case Law

  • In Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. and Ors. (2006), the Supreme Court held that ownership has no connection with mischief. Thus, the owners can also commit mischief.