Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of Hurt
Section 332: Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever voluntarily causes hurt to any person being a public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant, or with intent to prevent or deter that person or any other public servant from discharging his duty as such public servant, or in consequence of anything done or attempted to be done by that person in the lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
State amendments to this section
Maharashtra. Amendment of section 332 of 45 of 1860.—In section 332 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in its application to the State of Maharashtra (hereinafter, in this Chapter, referred to as “the said Code”), for the words “three years” the words “five years” shall be substituted. [Vide Maharashtra Act 50 of 2018, sec. 2]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 332
-
Gurdeep Singh v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose whether the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences u/ss.307, 353, 332, 225, 186, and 120B IPC and s.25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the courts below was legally sustainable.
-
Dhirubhai Bhailalbhai Chauhan & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court qua the appellants; whether in the facts of the case, mere presence of the appellants at the scene of crime, without…
-
Union of India and Others v. Shishu Pal @ Shiv Pal
Appellants, if justified in terminating the services of the respondent on the post of Constable (GD) in the CRPF after conducting a departmental inquiry against him on receiving information that he had deliberately…
- Zakir Abdul Mirajkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- Parveen @ Sonu v. The State of Haryana
- V. Rajaram v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police Cbi/Scb
- Bilal Hajar @ Abdul Hameed v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police
- Ganga Malik v. Union of India & Ors.
- Prem Giri v. State of Rajasthan
- Monica Kumar & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- Surajsinh Alias Sonu Surajsinh Collectorsinh Alias Sevaram Rajput v. State of Gujarat
- M/S. v. L. S. Finance Ltd. v. S. P. Gupta and Anr.
- Shaileshbhai @ Pappu Balubhai Chunara & Anr. v. State of Gujrat
- Govt. of A.P. & Anr. v. B. Jagjeevan Rao
- Pramod Kumar v. State (Gnct) of Delhi
- Abdul Nawaz v. State of West Bengal
- Mahendra Singh v. State of Utiaranchal
- Babubhai v. State of Gujarat & Ors. Etc.
- Jagtamba Devi v. Hem Ram and Ors.
- Mohd. Aslam @ Bhure v. State of U.P. and Ors.
- Sube Singh v. State of Haryana and Ors.
- State (N.C.T. of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu@Afsan Guru
- Simon and Ors. v. State of Karnataka
- State of Haryana and Ors. v. Mohinder Singh
- State of Haryana v. Ghaseeta Ram
- Ahmad Umar Saeed Sheikh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Shamshul Kanwar v. State of U.P.
- Delhi Judicial Service Association Tis Hazari Court, Delhi Etc. Etc. v. State of Gujarat and Ors. Etc. Etc.