IPC Section 47 - “Animal”

In criminal law, precise definitions are critical to ensure clarity in enforcement and prosecution. One such foundational term is “animal.” While the term may seem self-explanatory, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) under Section 47 [Now replaced by BNS 2(2)] offers a specific legal definition. This becomes important in offenses related to cruelty, property damage, public safety, and even religious sentiments.

In this blog, we’ll explore:

• The legal definition and simplified meaning of IPC Section 47
• How “animal” is interpreted under Indian criminal law
• Scope of this definition in various IPC offenses
• Examples illustrating legal usage of “animal”
• IPC sections that rely on this definition
• Judicial interpretation and relevant case laws
• Real-life importance in criminal proceedings

What Is IPC Section 47?

Legal Definition:

“The word ‘animal’ denotes any living creature other than a human being.”

Simplified Explanation:

In simple words, an animal under IPC Section 47 refers to all living beings that are not human. This includes mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, fish, and more. Whether it’s a dog, cow, tiger, or honeybee, all fall under this definition for the purpose of criminal law. This broad scope ensures that acts of cruelty, injury, or exploitation against any non-human living being can be addressed under appropriate legal sections.

Why Is IPC Section 47 Important?

The definition of "animal" in IPC Section 47 forms the basis for interpreting crimes involving harm to non-human life. Without this clarity, courts and law enforcement would face difficulty in determining the applicability of charges in:

• Animal cruelty or neglect cases
• Religious or communal offenses involving animals
• Damage to animals as movable property
• Public nuisance and safety risks caused by animals

This section ensures that non-human life is legally recognized and protected in various contexts under criminal law.

Illustrative Examples

Example 1: Cruelty to Street Dog

A man is seen throwing acid on a street dog out of anger. While the dog is not a person, under IPC Section 47, it is still an “animal,” and the man can be prosecuted under Section 428 (mischief by killing or maiming an animal).

Example 2: Killing a Cow to Incite Religious Tensions

Someone intentionally slaughters a cow during a sensitive religious festival to provoke unrest. Here, Section 47 ensures the cow is legally recognized as an “animal,” and this act may invoke Sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups) or 295A (deliberate religious insult).

Example 3: Poisoning a Neighbor’s Pet

A person poisons their neighbor’s cat due to personal disputes. The cat, being an “animal,” allows prosecution under Section 429 IPC for mischief involving animals of higher value.

IPC Sections That Rely On Section 47

Several important sections of the IPC directly rely on the definition provided in Section 47:

• Section 428 – Mischief by killing or maiming an animal worth less than ₹10
• Section 429 – Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, elephant, horse, or animal worth over ₹50
• Section 377 (repealed and read down) – Formerly included unnatural offenses against animals
• Section 503 – Criminal intimidation that may include threats to harm one’s animals
• Section 295A, 153A – Use of animals in communal or religiously offensive acts

These sections only apply effectively because the term “animal” is defined clearly and inclusively under IPC Section 47.

Case Laws On IPC Section 47

The following case laws highlight how this definition influences judgments involving cruelty, mischief, and property rights.

1. Karnail Singh & Ors vs State Of Haryana (2019)

Facts:
The accused were found transporting cows in trucks without proper documents. Both the drivers and conductors were apprehended. The cows were recovered, medically examined, and sent to a gaushala (cow shelter). The accused were convicted and sentenced by the trial court.

Held:
In the case of Karnail Singh & Ors vs State Of Haryana (2019) High Court, in its revision petition, noted the conviction for illegal transportation of cows. While the main issue was not about the definition of "animal," the case fundamentally relied on the fact that cows are included in the definition of "animal" under IPC Section 47. The conviction was upheld, and the sentencing was considered in light of the legal protections for animals as defined by IPC Section 47.

2. Alim vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others (2018)

Facts:
The case pertained to animal cruelty and specifically addressed the killing or maiming of animals, including stray dogs, by methods such as strychnine injections. The petitioners sought enforcement of animal protection laws.

Held:
In the case of Alim vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others (2018), the Court observed that "animal" as defined by IPC Section 47 includes all living creatures other than human beings, thus covering stray dogs and other animals. The judgment reinforced the application of animal cruelty provisions, relying on the broad definition in IPC Section 47 to protect all non-human animals.

3. Dr. Maya D. Chablani vs Smt Radha Mittal & Ors. (2021)

Facts:
The dispute involved the feeding of stray dogs near the entrance/exit of a property. The issue was settled amicably, but the legal context included the rights and protection of stray dogs under animal welfare laws.

Held:
While the main dispute was settled, the court’s order reflected the understanding that stray dogs are "animals" under IPC Section 47 and are thus entitled to protection under relevant animal welfare statutes. In the case of Dr. Maya D. Chablani vs Smt Radha Mittal & Ors. (2021) The court facilitated a resolution that respected the legal status of stray dogs as protected animals.

Conclusion

Though IPC Section 47 may appear to be a basic definitional clause, its scope and relevance stretch across numerous offenses. Legally recognizing all non-human living beings as animals, it supports animal protection, property rights, and public order provisions under the IPC.

Whether it’s a matter of cruelty, religious tension, or mischief involving livestock, this section ensures that animals are not legally invisible and have their place in criminal jurisprudence.