Offences Against Property under BNS
Chapter XVII of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 303–334, consolidates the principal offences against property. The chapter moves from unlawful taking of property to coercive acquisition, group violence, breach of entrustment, deception, destruction and unlawful entry.
For a complete conceptual foundation, read this with the BNS foundation guide, General Exceptions under BNS, abetment, conspiracy and attempt, and offences affecting the human body.
- Section 303 defines theft and contains a special community-service rule for qualifying first-time petty theft below ₹5,000 after restoration or return.
- Section 304 specifically recognises snatching as theft committed by suddenly, quickly or forcibly seizing property from a person or possession.
- Section 308 deals with extortion; Section 309 robbery; Section 310 dacoity.
- Section 316 criminal breach of trust requires entrustment or dominion over property.
- Section 318 cheating requires deception; dishonest inducement must be examined at the relevant stage, especially where a civil dispute is alleged.
- Section 324 begins the mischief block; Section 329 begins criminal trespass and house-trespass.
- The highest-yield exam distinctions are theft vs snatching, extortion vs robbery, robbery vs dacoity, misappropriation vs breach of trust, breach of trust vs cheating, and civil trespass vs criminal trespass.
- Theft and snatching
- Extortion, robbery and dacoity
- Dishonest misappropriation and criminal breach of trust
- Stolen property and receiving stolen property
- Cheating and cheating by personation
- Fraudulent dispositions of property
- Mischief
- Criminal trespass and house-breaking
- Leading cases, distinctions and exam tools
Official Statutory Structure
The authoritative text is available on India Code — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Ministry of Home Affairs New Criminal Laws portal. Chapter XVII runs from Section 303 to Section 334 and is divided into theft, extortion, robbery and dacoity, criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, receiving stolen property, cheating, fraudulent deeds/dispositions, mischief and criminal trespass.
Part I — Theft and Snatching: Sections 303–307
Section 303 — Theft
Theft is committed when a person, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of another person’s possession without consent, moves that property in order to such taking. The statutory definition therefore requires five recurring elements:
Theft protects possession, not merely ownership. Even one’s own property may, in appropriate circumstances, be the subject of theft if another has lawful possession and the taking is dishonest. Conversely, mere physical removal without dishonest intention is not theft.
K.N. Mehra v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1957 SC 369, is a leading authority on dishonest intention in theft. Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1963 SC 1094, demonstrates that even temporary removal may amount to theft where dishonest intention and the statutory ingredients are present.
Section 304 — Snatching
The BNS expressly defines snatching. Theft becomes snatching where, in order to commit theft, the offender suddenly, quickly or forcibly seizes, secures, grabs or takes away movable property from a person or from that person’s possession. Snatching is punishable with imprisonment up to three years and fine.
| Theft — Section 303 | Snatching — Section 304 |
|---|---|
| Dishonest taking of movable property from possession without consent. | A species of theft involving sudden, quick or forcible seizure/grabbing. |
| No special manner of taking is required beyond movement. | Manner of taking is central to the offence. |
| Section 303. | Section 304 — a distinct BNS provision. |
Sections 305–307 — Aggravated Theft
Theft in a dwelling house, means of transportation, place of worship and other specified locations.
Theft by clerk or servant of property in the possession of the master or employer.
Theft after preparation for causing death, hurt or restraint, or fear of those consequences, in order to commit or facilitate theft.
Part II — Extortion, Robbery and Dacoity: Sections 308–313
Section 308 — Extortion
Extortion requires intentionally putting a person in fear of injury and thereby dishonestly inducing delivery of property, valuable security or an instrument capable of becoming valuable security. The BNS illustration expressly recognises threats communicated through an electronic device.
Section 309 — Robbery
Robbery is an aggravated form of either theft or extortion. Theft becomes robbery when, for committing the theft or carrying away the property, the offender causes or attempts to cause death, hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death, hurt or restraint. Extortion becomes robbery where the offender is sufficiently present, puts the victim in fear of instant death, hurt or restraint, and thereby induces delivery then and there.
| Extortion | Robbery by Extortion |
|---|---|
| Fear of injury is sufficient. | Fear must be of instant death, instant hurt or instant wrongful restraint. |
| Delivery may occur later. | Delivery is induced then and there. |
| Offender need not be physically near. | Presence or sufficient proximity is required by the statutory concept. |
Section 310 — Dacoity
Dacoity is robbery committed or attempted conjointly by five or more persons, counting those present and aiding the commission or attempt. The number five is therefore not merely evidentiary; it is a defining statutory ingredient.
Aggravated theft or extortion involving the statutory violence/fear conditions.
Robbery or attempted robbery by five or more persons conjointly.
Section 310(3) creates collective liability where murder is committed while five or more conjointly commit dacoity.
Section 310 also expressly punishes preparation for dacoity, assembly of five or more for dacoity, and belonging to a gang habitually associated with dacoity. These are important exceptions to the general rule that mere preparation is ordinarily not punishable.
Sections 311–313 — Aggravated Robbery and Gang Liability
| Section | Subject |
|---|---|
| 311 | Robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt. |
| 312 | Attempt to commit robbery or dacoity when armed with a deadly weapon. |
| 313 | Punishment for belonging to a gang of robbers, thieves or specified habitual offenders. |
Part III — Misappropriation, Breach of Trust and Stolen Property
Sections 314–315 — Dishonest Misappropriation
Section 314 addresses dishonest misappropriation or conversion to one’s own use of movable property. Unlike theft, the initial acquisition or possession need not itself be unlawful. Liability may arise because the dishonest conversion occurs later.
Section 315 deals specifically with dishonest misappropriation of property known to have been in the possession of a deceased person at the time of death before it comes into the possession of a person legally entitled to it.
Section 316 — Criminal Breach of Trust
Criminal breach of trust requires entrustment of property or dominion over property, followed by dishonest misappropriation, conversion, use or disposal in violation of law or of a legal contract governing the trust. The offence therefore has two indispensable stages: lawful or recognised entrustment, and subsequent dishonest dealing.
Property or dominion over property must be entrusted in some manner.
The accused must act dishonestly; mere breach, loss or negligence is insufficient.
Misappropriation, conversion, prohibited use/disposal or wilfully permitting another to do so.
Section 316 separately enhances punishment for breach of trust by carriers, warehouse-keepers, clerks/servants, public servants and persons acting as bankers, merchants, brokers, attorneys or agents. The Supreme Court in Velji Raghavji Patel v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1433, emphasised the centrality of entrustment; State of Gujarat v. Jaswantlal Nathalal likewise treats entrustment as foundational.
Misappropriation vs Criminal Breach of Trust
| Misappropriation — Section 314 | Criminal Breach of Trust — Section 316 |
|---|---|
| Entrustment is not an essential ingredient. | Entrustment or dominion is essential. |
| Property may initially come into possession innocently. | Property is held under a relationship of entrustment or dominion. |
| Dishonest conversion/misappropriation is central. | Dishonest misuse in violation of the trust/law/contract is central. |
Section 317 — Stolen Property
Section 317 defines and punishes receiving, retaining or dealing with stolen property in specified circumstances. The concept extends beyond property taken by theft: depending on the statutory definition, property transferred by extortion or robbery, or affected by criminal misappropriation or breach of trust, may also constitute stolen property until it lawfully returns to the person entitled to possess it.
Part IV — Cheating and Fraudulent Property Dealings
Section 318 — Cheating
Cheating begins with deception. The deception must fraudulently or dishonestly induce the person deceived to deliver property or consent to retention of property, or intentionally induce an act or omission which the person would not otherwise do and which causes or is likely to cause legally recognised harm.
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar, (2000) 4 SCC 168, is the classic Supreme Court authority distinguishing cheating from a mere breach of contract. S.W. Palanitkar v. State of Bihar, (2002) 1 SCC 241, and V.Y. Jose v. State of Gujarat, (2009) 3 SCC 78, reinforce the need to identify the requisite dishonest intention and the exact criminal ingredients.
Criminal Breach of Trust vs Cheating
| Criminal Breach of Trust — Section 316 | Cheating — Section 318 |
|---|---|
| Starts with entrustment or dominion over property. | Starts with deception. |
| Dishonest conversion/misuse occurs after or in relation to entrustment. | Dishonest/fraudulent inducement is central to obtaining the act, omission or property. |
| Property relationship is foundational. | Deception and inducement are foundational. |
| A mere failure to account is not enough without dishonesty. | A mere broken promise is not enough without dishonest intention at the relevant stage. |
Section 319 — Cheating by Personation
Cheating by personation occurs where cheating is committed by pretending to be another person, knowingly substituting one person for another, or representing that oneself or another person is someone other than who that person really is. Modern impersonation may involve electronic communications, false digital identities or fabricated credentials, but the statutory ingredients must still be proved.
Sections 320–323 — Fraudulent Deeds and Dispositions
| Section | Subject |
|---|---|
| 320 | Dishonest or fraudulent removal/concealment of property to prevent distribution among creditors. |
| 321 | Dishonestly or fraudulently preventing debt from being available for creditors. |
| 322 | Dishonest/fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing false statement of consideration. |
| 323 | Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property. |
Part V — Mischief: Sections 324–328
Section 324 — Mischief
Mischief concerns intentional or knowing interference with property causing destruction, change or diminution of value or utility, accompanied by the statutorily required intention or knowledge of causing wrongful loss or damage. It is different from theft because the object is not necessarily dishonest taking; the gravamen is damaging or adversely altering property or its value/utility.
| Theft | Mischief |
|---|---|
| Dishonest taking/moving of movable property. | Damage, destruction or adverse change to property/value/utility with required intent/knowledge. |
| Possession is central. | Wrongful loss or damage through interference with property is central. |
Sections 325–328 — Aggravated Mischief
Mischief by killing or maiming an animal.
Aggravated mischief involving injury, inundation, fire, explosive substance and other specified serious means or consequences.
Mischief intended to destroy or make unsafe a rail, aircraft or specified vessel.
Intentionally running a vessel aground or ashore with intent to commit theft or another specified offence.
Part VI — Criminal Trespass and House-Breaking: Sections 329–334
Section 329 — Criminal Trespass and House-Trespass
Criminal trespass is not established merely because entry is unauthorised. The prosecution must prove the specific criminal intent accompanying entry into or unlawful remaining upon property in another’s possession—such as intent to commit an offence, or to intimidate, insult or annoy the person in possession, as provided by the statute.
House-trespass is the aggravated form of criminal trespass involving entry into or remaining in a building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling, place of worship or place for custody of property, subject to the statutory definition.
Sections 330–334 — House-Breaking and Aggravated Trespass
| Section | Subject |
|---|---|
| 330 | House-trespass and house-breaking; defines the aggravated modes of entry/exit. |
| 331 | Punishment for house-trespass or house-breaking, with graded aggravated situations. |
| 332 | House-trespass in order to commit an offence. |
| 333 | House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint. |
| 334 | Dishonestly breaking open or unfastening a receptacle containing property, including aggravated liability where the receptacle was entrusted. |
High-Yield Distinctions
Snatching is theft plus the statutorily specified sudden, quick or forcible seizure.
Robbery requires the more immediate violence/fear and presence conditions specified in Section 309.
Dacoity requires five or more persons conjointly committing, attempting or aiding robbery.
CBT begins with entrustment; cheating begins with deception and inducement.
Important Cases at a Glance
| Case | Exam Principle |
|---|---|
| K.N. Mehra v. State of Rajasthan | Dishonest intention is fundamental to theft. |
| Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan | Temporary removal can amount to theft where statutory dishonesty is present. |
| Velji Raghavji Patel v. State of Maharashtra | Entrustment is central to criminal breach of trust. |
| Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar | Cheating must be distinguished from subsequent breach of contract; intention at inducement is crucial. |
| S.W. Palanitkar v. State of Bihar | Identify the separate ingredients of cheating and criminal breach of trust rather than criminalising a civil dispute by label. |
How to Solve a Property-Offence Problem
- Identify how the property changed hands: taking, delivery under fear, entrustment, deception, finding, receipt, destruction or unlawful entry.
- Ask whether the property is movable and who had possession.
- Identify the mental element: dishonesty, fraud, knowledge, intention to cause fear, or intention to intimidate/annoy/commit offence.
- For theft, check consent and movement.
- For robbery, determine whether theft or extortion was aggravated by the statutory violence/fear conditions.
- For dacoity, count all persons conjointly committing, attempting or aiding.
- For breach of trust, prove entrustment before analysing misappropriation.
- For cheating, locate the deception and dishonest inducement.
- For trespass, do not stop at unauthorised entry—prove the criminal intent required by Section 329.
- Check the BNSS classification of the offence for cognizability, bail and the competent court.
Frequently Asked Examination Questions
- Define theft under Section 303 and state its ingredients.
- What is snatching under Section 304? Distinguish it from theft and robbery.
- Distinguish theft and extortion.
- When does theft become robbery?
- When does extortion become robbery?
- Distinguish robbery and dacoity.
- Why is preparation for dacoity punishable?
- Distinguish dishonest misappropriation and criminal breach of trust.
- Explain entrustment under Section 316.
- Distinguish criminal breach of trust and cheating.
- When does breach of contract amount to cheating?
- Explain stolen property under Section 317.
- Define mischief under Section 324.
- Distinguish criminal trespass and house-trespass.
- What mental element converts a civil entry dispute into criminal trespass?
Exam Answer Toolkit
State the section, definition and ingredients; add one statutory illustration or leading case; finish with the closest distinction.
Add statutory scheme, aggravated forms, competing offences, punishment structure, case law, comparison table and BNSS classification.
One-Minute Revision
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Theft? | Section 303 |
| Snatching? | Section 304 |
| Extortion? | Section 308 |
| Robbery? | Section 309 |
| Dacoity? | Section 310 |
| Misappropriation? | Section 314 |
| Criminal breach of trust? | Section 316 |
| Cheating? | Section 318 |
| Mischief? | Section 324 |
| Criminal trespass? | Section 329 |
Chapter XVII is best understood by identifying how the accused interfered with property: taking, coercion, violent taking, entrustment, deception, damage or unlawful entry. Once that mechanism is identified, the distinctions between Sections 303–334 become much easier to apply.
Exam sequence: property and possession → mode of interference → dishonest/fraudulent intention → statutory aggravation → competing offence → punishment → BNSS procedure.
Academic note: This material is intended for legal education and examination preparation. Students should consult the latest official BNS and BNSS texts and full judgments for authoritative study.