Section 310 IPC: Thug

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 310 IPC at a Glance

Section 310 IPC defines who is a thug. It has no direct equivalent in the BNS.

Punishment

Section 310 IPC sets no punishment of its own. Whoever is a thug is punished under Section 311 IPC with imprisonment for life.

Section 310 IPC Bare Act Text

310. Thug

Whoever, at any time after the passing of this Act, shall have been habitually associated with any other or others for the purpose of committing robbery or child-stealing by means of or accompanied with murder, is a thug.

Source: Section 310, Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 310 IPC in Simple Words

Section 310 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines a thug. Whoever, at any time after the passing of the Act, has been habitually associated with any other or others for the purpose of committing robbery or child-stealing by means of or accompanied with murder, is a thug.

The section is a definition and prescribes no penalty of its own. Being a thug is punished under Section 311 IPC with imprisonment for life and liability to fine.

The section has no counterpart in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and is repealed.

Ingredients of Section 310 IPC

  • The person was habitually associated with any other person or persons
  • The association was for the purpose of committing robbery or child-stealing
  • The robbery or child-stealing was to be committed by means of or accompanied with murder
  • The association existed at any time after the passing of the Act

Punishment Under Section 310 IPC

Imprisonment

Section 310 IPC sets no punishment of its own. Whoever is a thug is punished under Section 311 IPC with imprisonment for life.

Fine

Section 310 IPC sets no fine. Under Section 311 IPC, the offender is also liable to fine.

Section 310 IPC defines a thug and prescribes no separate punishment. The penalty of imprisonment for life and liability to fine is provided by Section 311 IPC.

Example of Section 310 IPC

In 2012 in Gwalior, police arrested Devraj along with three accomplices, Madan, Pratap, and Raghu. Investigation showed that over several years after the enactment of the Indian Penal Code, Devraj had been habitually associated with those three men as an organised gang operating across nearby villages. Their common purpose was to abduct young children from families by murdering the parents or caretakers who guarded them. Because Devraj was habitually associated with others for the purpose of committing child-stealing accompanied with murder, Devraj is a thug within Section 310 IPC.

When Section 310 IPC Does Not Apply

  • The person acted alone or joined others only on a single isolated occasion rather than being habitually associated with them.
  • The habitual association was formed for offences other than robbery or child-stealing, such as house-breaking or cheating.
  • The group committed or intended robbery or child-stealing without using murder as a means or accompaniment.

Section 310 IPC in the BNS

Repealed - No equivalent in BNS

Repealed. The BNS has no section defining a thug, and the official comparison lists Section 310 IPC as deleted. The offence is not carried forward.

FAQs on Section 310 IPC

What did Section 310 IPC provide?▼

It defined a thug as whoever, after the passing of the Act, was habitually associated with any other or others for committing robbery or child-stealing by means of or accompanied with murder.

What was the punishment under Section 310 IPC?▼

Section 310 IPC was a definition section and prescribed no penalty. The punishment was in Section 311 IPC.

Which section punished the conduct defined in Section 310 IPC?▼

Section 311 IPC punished whoever was a thug with imprisonment for life and liability to fine.

Does the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita contain a counterpart to Section 310 IPC?▼

No. The BNS does not define a thug and contains no counterpart to Section 310 IPC.

Is Section 111 BNS the equivalent of Section 310 IPC?▼

No. Section 111 BNS is a new section on organised crime with its own statutory definitions and is not a replacement for Section 310 IPC.

Was Section 310 IPC bailable or cognizable?▼

Section 310 IPC had no entry in the First Schedule to the Code of Criminal Procedure because it created no offence. Section 311 IPC was cognizable and non-bailable.

Which court tried an offence involving Section 310 IPC?▼

Section 311 IPC was triable by the Court of Session.

Could an offence under Section 310 IPC be compounded?▼

Section 310 IPC created no offence of its own. The offence under Section 311 IPC was not compoundable.

Where is Section 310 IPC in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?▼

It has no counterpart in the BNS and is repealed.

Have questions about Section 310 IPC?

Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, punishment details, or how it applies to your situation.

Ask NyayGuru →

Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Bare Act Text, Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Last updated: 16 Oct 2026 ·