Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 44
repealedInjury
The word “injury” denotes any harm whatsoever illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property.
Why this exists
The IPC uses the term 'injury' in many offences (like criminal intimidation, mischief, or wrongful loss), so this section gives it a wide, uniform meaning. By including body, mind, reputation, and property, the drafters ensured that harms beyond physical wounds — such as defaming someone or damaging their belongings — would also count as 'injury' wherever that word appears in the Code, as long as the harm was caused illegally.
How courts read it
Courts have treated this as a foundational definitional section, applying its broad scope whenever 'injury' appears in specific offences elsewhere in the IPC (such as Sections 319-338 on hurt, or provisions on intimidation and mischief). Judges have emphasized that the harm must be 'illegally caused' — meaning lawful acts causing harm (like a surgeon's authorized operation) don't qualify as 'injury' under this definition.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Injury under the IPC only means physical wounds or bruises.
Fact: Section 44 makes clear that harm to mind, reputation, or property also counts as 'injury,' not just bodily harm. - Myth: Any harm at all is called 'injury' under this law.
Fact: The harm must be caused illegally — lawful actions that cause harm (like authorized medical treatment) don't count as 'injury' under this section.