Section 448 of IPC- Punishment for House Trespass

Section 448- Punishment for House trespass-

“Whoever commits house-trespass shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.”

Before going to House trespass, we need to know what is trespass. And, in what circumstances trespass is criminal trespass. Ordinarily, trespass is a civil wrong for which a defendant has the right to sue. Lord Macaulay, defined ” trespass is every usurpation, however slight, of dominion over property’. But only when it includes criminal intention, it becomes Criminal trespass. Whereas, Section 441 on Indian Penal Code defines criminal trespass.

Section 441- Criminal Trespass

“Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property, or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit “criminal trespass”.

The only difference between trespass and criminal trespass is Intention. A trespass with an intention to commit an offense is criminal trespass. The object of Section 441 is to protect the possession of the property. This section is concerned with possession, but not with ownership Sahebrao Kisan Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra[1].  It is not relevant if the person has entered the property lawfully or unlawfully. Lawfully entering a property and staying there unlawfully with an intention to commit an offense, is criminal trespass.

Further, Section 447 lays down the punishment for Criminal trespass. Punishment for Criminal Trespass is imprisonment of up to 3 months or fine up to Rs.500 or both.

Read Also: Top 10 Criminals of India – You Don’t Know

Section 442- House trespass

“Whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or any building used as a place for worship, or as a place for the custody of property, is said to commit “house-trespass”.

The offense of house-trespass is an aggravated form of criminal trespass. The House trespass must have all the ingredients of criminal trespass. moreover, in addition to the element of criminal trespass, the house-trespass occurs at entering or remaining on the property. Here, Property includes any building tent, vessel, place of worship or any place for Human Dwelling.

The building here constitutes any place which can give protection to any human or any person dwelling inside it. Or any property placed inside it. The mere surrounding of any place by fencing or any wire of any opens space does not construe building. And trespass upon such space is not House-trespass.

However, in order to attract House trespass, an illegal entry upon the premises is necessary. A person does not commit house-trespass if he enters the property with permission or consent.

Rajmogali Ashayya Arkal and others. vs. Govind Hanumantu Nandlal and Anr.[2]

Punishment

As stated earlier, House trespass is an aggravated form of criminal trespass. So the punishment is also more than ordinary trespass. Punishment for House trespass can extend up to one year or fine up to 1000 or both. Moreover, this offense is compoundable, bailable and cognizable :

• Compoundable Offence

Those offenses in which compromise can be done at the instance of the party, are compoundable in nature. Hence, a compromise is available in the offense of House trespass. If the aggrieved party gives consent, without any force or undue influence, to compromise. In such a case, they can avoid a trial.

• Cognizable offense

In Cognizable offense, police have the authority to arrest the person without any warrant. Also, police can start an investigation without the order of the court. Here, police can arrest a person on the mere complaint of aggrieved and/or founding accused on the property. Police do not require any warrant or order from the court.

• Bailable Offence

In an offense, police have the authority to release an offender on bail. The offense of House-trespass in enumerated under the list of Bailable offences. Hence, a person accused of House-trespass has the option to get bail. One can provide for security to get the bail.

Conclusion

A person commits House-trespass upon entering any property of others with a criminal intention. For entering, it is not necessary to enter completely, but any part of the body is sufficient to construe House-trespass. The Offence is Compoundable as it is easy to compromise outside the court and the nature of the crime is less serious as it does not harm the body of the individual. Whereas, Cognizable as the police requires to act as soon as possible on the complaint. If the police have to wait for the warrant it will be too late.

Compoundable and Non Compoundable offence in India

Introduction

Lawmakers classified offence into three categories on the basis of their nature, taking the reference of policy-making. These categories are: Firstly, cognizable offence and non-cognizable offence, secondly, bailable offence and non-bailable offence, and thirdly, compoundable and non-compoundable offence.

In actual, when a layman tries to understand the philosophy behind these terms he may think that basis of these classifications is based on seriousness or gravity of the offence, or on the gravity of the punishment.

Yes! He might be correct but not as a whole for the classification isn’t limited to these perspectives. It is the matter of policy-making to categorize the offences.  The sole purpose is to smoothen the criminal justice system.

To understand the scenario, we first look at the bare provisions regarding the first two categories in brief. Further, we’ll discuss the Compoundable and Non-Compoundable offences in details.

Bailable and Non-Bailable offences

According to Section 2(a) of CrPC:-

‘Bailable offence’ means an offence which is shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or which is bailable by any other law for the time being in force.  ‘Non-bailable offence’ means any other offences. It clearly demarcates if an act which is an offence under the IPC is bailable or not, written in First Schedule. Whatever may be the nature of the offence, if the first schedule mentions it as bailable then it’s bailable. We can see in Section 147 of IPC, the offence of ‘rioting’ which sounds grave but it is a bailable offence, though it is cognizable.

Cognizable and Non-Cognizable offences

According to Section 2(c) of CrPC:-

‘Cognizable offence’ means an offence for which a police officer may in accordance with first schedule arrest without a warrant. We can see Section 466 of IPC, which says, Offence is Forgery of a record of a Court of Justice or of a Registrar of Births, etc., kept by a public servant. Although, it is grave and punishable with the imprisonment for 7 years and fine. It is ‘non-cognizable’ offence while it’s non-bailable in nature.

Compoundable and Non-Compoundable offences

A wrong against society and the state is a serious crime. Therefore, any compromise between the accused and the individual victim of the crime should not absolve the accused from criminal responsibility while some wrongs are of a private nature and are relatively less serious, CrPC considers it expedient to recognize some of them as compoundable offences while others as non-compoundable.

Compounding of Offences Under Ipc

‘Compoundable offences’ are those offences which are relatively less grave in nature in which compromise can be made between the individual and the accused while on the other hand ‘non-compoundable offences’ are those in which compromise can’t be made because of it affects society at large.

The compoundable offences are mostly non-cognizable but the vice-versa is not correct. Section 320 of CrPC deals with the general scheme of the compounding of offence.

Section 320 of CrPC

Offences mentioned in the table provided in section 320 of CrPC are of compoundable in nature. By the way of compounding the offence, the trial comes to end without complete disposal of the case.

Section 320 of CrPC reads as follows: 320(1) The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) specified in the first two columns of the Table next following may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table. In the table, 21 penal offences are listed, some of these are Sec 298,323,334 of IPC etc. Sec 334 of IPC is an offence of ‘voluntarily causing hurt on provocation’. Sec 323 of IPC is an offence of ‘voluntarily causing hurt’.

320(2) The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) specified in the first two columns of the table next following may, with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending, be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of the table. In this table, 36 other penal offences are listed.

Briefly, Offences enumerated under section 320(2) are compoundable with the prior permission of the court. Offences under section 320(1)  are compoundable as a matter of right.

Special or local laws and ambit of section 320 CrPC

According to the scheme of the section, all offences under the special or local laws are simply non-compoundable. Further,  it is left to the wisdom of the legislature to decide as a matter of policy whether and to what extent offences under such laws should be compoundable.

Offences under IPC other than enumerated in Section 320 of CrPC

In the end, section 320(9) of CrPC makes it quite clear that offences not provided in this section are not compoundable. It means there is no effect of compromise on criminal liability of the offence other than this section.

However, the Supreme Court gave permission for compounding the offence under section 307,IPC (attempt to commit murder) in ‘Mahesh Chand v State of Rajasthan’ [1]. The Supreme Court in ‘Ram Lal v State of J&K’ [2], overruled its decision and held that an offence which law declares to be non-compoundable even with the permission of the court cannot be compoundable at all.

In ‘B.S. Joshi v State of Haryana'[3], Supreme Court held that in a situation of proceedings on the basis of non-compoundable offences like Section 498-A and 406, the High Court could quash them under Section 482 CrPC.

In ‘Gian Singh v State of Punjab’, [4], the Supreme Court upholding the decision of ‘B.S. Joshi v State of Haryana'[3], and observed that offences arising out of family disputes or matrimony relating to dowry, etc in which wrong is basically private in nature and parties have resolved their disputes, High Court may quash the proceeding under Section 482 of the Code. This power is different from the power of a criminal court to compound the offences.

Conclusion

Offences in which compromise can be made are compoundable otherwise non-compoundable. In non-compoundable offences, Court may compound the offence i.e. allowing the compromise. Basically, the offences in which criminal liability seizes at the stance of compromise are compoundable offences while criminal liability never comes to an end although compromise has been done between the parties are called non-compoundable offences.

However, in determining the quantum of sentence court considers the fact of compromise. All others special and local laws are non-compoundable if the option of compromise is not expressly provided in the statute.

---

1. 1990 Supp (1) SCC 681

2. (1999) 2 SCC 213

3. (2003) 4 SCC 675

4. (2012) 10 SCC 303