Skip to main content

Mischief - offences against property and animal

 


Mischief- Offences against animal and property
Section 425
Speaks about if any person causes damage to any person or public property that in result effects the durability ,physical condition of the property , or reduces the utility of the property or causes damage to it intentionally or with the knowledge that their particular action can cause damage and hence to loss to the other person.

Case laws :

In, Krishna Gopal Singh and Ors. V. the state of U.P -
It was held that, the offence of mischief would not be committed if the accused has not committed an act with the intend to cause wrongful loss or damage to any person or the public at large . It also implies that acts done under any pressure , without the free consent of the accused ,do not come under the ambit of mischief.

Nagendranth Roy v. Bijoy Kumar das Verma

It was held that ,mere negligence is not mischief. Negligence followed with the intention to cause wrongful loss or damage will amount to mischief.


In , Indian Oil corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. and Ors -

It was held that ,the defendant removed the engines of the aircraft hence diminishing its utility and rendering it useless. It was held that the damage cost satisfied all the elements of mischief and this offence of Mischief was constituted.


In , Nagnedranath v. state of Bengal

Accused trespassed an institution and burnt books and records. He also threatened the Staff of the institution saying that he could put a bomb on the institution .It was held that the respondent has conducted mischief as his actions has resulted in the loss of assets of that institution , which would result in loss of the owner of the institution.

Sec 426 speaks about punishment for mischief it can go up to 3 months punishment or fine or both , they are non-cognizable offences , bailable offences ,any magistrate can conduct the trial. They are compoundable offences when only loss or damage is done to an individual.

Section 427 speaks about whoever causes damage that amounts to Rs.50 or more , the punishment can go up to 3 years imprisonment or fine or both . It is a non-cognizable , bailable offence and any magistrate can conduct the trial .
Mischief can be caused with animals, cattle, water supply, public roads, bridges, rivers, channels, public drainage, lighthouse, seamark or landmarks, fire to property or agriculture would also amount to mischief, damage to debt ship or ship with more than 20 tonnes of goods, fire to ship, or mischief committed after preparation for causing death, hurt etc.


Section 428 Speaks about , If any person causes harm to animal of the value of Rs.10 or more in such a way by killing or maiming cattle would amount to mischief .

The mischievous offence would be punished for imprisonment of two years or fine or both.It is a cognizable ,bailable Offence and it is compoundable if the owner of the animal gives consent for the same.

Section 429 speaks about the mischief caused by a person that renders any cattle dead or injured of the value of Rs.50 or more would be sentenced to imprisonment of five years or fine or both it is a cognizable, bailable, any magistrate of first class can conduct the trial.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Empowering Businesses: Virtual Corporate Law Services

  Empowering Businesses: Virtual Corporate Law Services In the dynamic world of business, legal support is crucial to ensure smooth operations, mitigate risks, and navigate regulatory landscapes. Lexis and Company offers Virtual Corporate Law Services to businesses in the UK, USA, Canada, Singapore, Dubai, and Australia , assisting with mergers, acquisitions, business contracts, compliance, and corporate governance. Key Features of Virtual Corporate Law Services 1. Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) Legal Support We provide comprehensive legal services for mergers and acquisitions , including due diligence, structuring deals, drafting agreements, and navigating regulatory approvals. Benefits: Ensures smooth and legally sound M&A transactions. Minimizes risks during corporate restructuring. Protects your business interests in high-value deals. Trending Hashtags: #MergersAndAcquisitions #BusinessDeals #CorporateLaw #LegalSupport #VirtualLegalExperts 2. Business Contracts and Ag...

Concept of constitutionalism

  Concept of constitutionalism Who Started Constitutionalism? John Locke - The English Bill of Rights is a foundational constitutional document that helped inspire the American Bill of Rights. Political theorist  John Locke  played a huge role in cementing the philosophy of constitutionalism.  Constitution is a written law which describes the structure of Government, the rules according to which the Govt. must work and the boundaries within which the Govt. must work. Constitutionalism   can be defined as the doctrine that governs the legitimacy of government action, and it implies something far more important than the idea of legality that requires official conduct to be in accordance with pre-fixed legal rules. Constitution constitution is the document that contains the basic and fundamental law of the nation, setting out the organization of the government and the principles of the society. Basic norm (or law) of the state; System of integration and organi...

Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 43

 Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 43 CITATION AIR 1966 SC 43 COURT Supreme Court of India JUDGES/CORAM Justice K.S. Shah and Justice R. Bachawat DATE OF JUDGEMENT 22.03.1965 Facts: The facts of the case are as follows: The appellant was a dealer in a food grains at Dhar in Madhya Pradesh prosecuted in the Court of Additional District Magistrate for possessing in stock maunds and 21/4 seers of wheat for the purpose of sale without license. Subsequently appellant was charged for committing an offence under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Thereafter the appellant pleaded there was no intention to contravene any provisions of the law and the grains were stored upon filing an application for license and upon believe that it will be issued to him. The appellant further stated that he continued to submit returns on the food grains stored and purchased to the respected authority. Thus, the appellant was acquitted in the Court of Additional District Magistra...