Section 428. Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees
SECTION 428 MISCHIEF BY KILLING OR MAIMING ANIMAL OF THE VALUE OF TEN RUPEES
Indian Penal Code is a criminal statute of India and is tend to cover each aspect of criminal law. The Indian Penal Code 1860 is divided into 23 chapters and consists of 511 sections. Section 20 of IPC deals with Court of Justice. Animals are the important part of the society and it’s very essential to protect the rights of the animals. There are various laws prevailing in India that protects the rights of the animals one such is Section 428 of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 47 of IPC defines animal as “the word “animal” denotes any living creature, other than a human being.”
SECTION 428 IPC
Section 428 of the Indian Penal Code, states the penalty for killing or causing injury (to wound or injure an animal so that part of the body is permanently damaged). Or providing useless any animal or animals of the value of ten rupees or upward and are simple or rigorous imprisonment for up to two years or with fine, or with both.
SECTION 429 IPC
Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code, states that the punishment for killing, poisoning, maiming, or rendering useless any animal or animals of the value of fifty rupees or upwards (which automatically includes all cattle/beasts of burden) are simple or rigorous imprisonment for up to five years, or with a fine, or with both.
SYED ALI & ANOHER V. STATE
In the above case Syed Ali and Ali Ahmed were pronounce guilty by the first class magistrate of Chazipur for committing a crime under Section 428 IPC and were penalized with Rs. 50 each and an imprisonment for a period of 15 days. The accused and the complainant lived in a village of Kotwali, Gazipur. Relations between the two were pinched due to the previous litigations. On 25th September 1979 that a hen which belonged to the plaintiff went to the doors of the accused. Following the instruction of Ali Ahmed, Syed Ali gave a blow on the neck og the hen with a stick. The hen died instantly. Hearing about the hen the plaintiff rose protest against the accused but the accused began to humiliate the plaintiff.
On the same day compliant was filled at the police station and the hen was taken for a medical examination. Following the post-mortem report it was found that the hen died to the injury in the neck which was result of the blow by a stick. But the accused kept on denying. The magistrate after looking on the evidences exonerated him for a crime under Section 506 IPC but charged with for an offence committed under Section 428 IPC.
Aggrieved there by Syed Ali and Ahmad filed a revision before the First Temporary Session Judge, Gazipur who has made reference to this Court for quashing the impugned order of the Magistrate.
The Counsel supported the decision of the Session judge and further stated that whether hen to be covered under the definition of animal as per IPC. Usually hen falls within the category of birds but as per the definition given by IPC the court can’t interpret by themselves until ambiguous. Section 47 of IPC clearly defines animal and from my point of view hen is to be covered under the definition of animal. The council stated that the accused are guilty but charging Rs. 50 for killing a hen is more the charge be reduced to Rs. 25 each.
The outcome therefore is in this reference is rejected and the order of the Munsif Magistrate is upheld. The fine which has been altered by the court shall be realised from the accused. And in case the accused has already deposited the amount the excess of it shall be refunded back to them and the plaintiff shall be compensated with Rs. 20.
So concluding it can be clearly stated that Section 428 IPC clearly states that whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless any animal or animals of the value of ten rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.