Datasets:
File size: 3,248 Bytes
a4e6865 d2d6e43 a4e6865 cf68062 a4e6865 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 | ---
license: cc-by-4.0
language:
- en
task_categories:
- text-retrieval
- text-classification
tags:
- legal
- law
- india
- indian-penal-code
- statute-identification
- retrieval
pretty_name: Indian IPC Statute Identification
size_categories:
- 10K<n<100K
configs:
- config_name: default
data_files: data/*.parquet
---
# Indian IPC Statute Identification
Given the **facts of an Indian court case**, identify the relevant **Indian Penal Code (IPC) section**. Each example
pairs the factual narrative of a High Court judgment with the text of an IPC section that the judgment applies.
The task is framed as retrieval / statute identification: from a fact scenario, retrieve (or classify) the governing
statute. It is a useful benchmark and training signal for legal information retrieval, legal text classification, and
domain adaptation of text embedding models to Indian criminal law.
## Contents
| column | description |
|--------|-------------|
| `case_facts` | The factual narrative from an Indian High Court judgment. Explicit references to the governing section (e.g. "Section 302 IPC", "u/s 420") are **masked as `[STATUTE]`** so the example is a genuine facts→statute task and cannot be solved by string-matching the section number. |
| `ipc_section` | The relevant IPC section number (e.g. `302`, `304B`, `498A`). |
| `statute_text` | The full operative text of that IPC section — the offence definition and punishment (the "Whoever… shall be punished…" statutory language). |
- **40,001** examples · **~14,900** distinct cases · **320** distinct IPC sections.
- A case charged under multiple sections appears as multiple rows (one per relevant section).
- The section distribution reflects real criminal litigation — the most frequent sections are the common offences
(murder §302, culpable homicide §304, hurt §323/§325, theft §379, cheating §420, cruelty §498A, rioting §147, …).
## How it was built
1. **Judgments**: factual narratives are drawn from Indian High Court judgments.
2. **Statute mapping**: each judgment's *own* citations to IPC sections are extracted (e.g. "under Section 302 IPC",
"u/s 420") — a factual reference contained in the public record of the judgment. Those citations are then **masked**
in `case_facts` so the model must infer the statute from the facts rather than read it off.
3. **Statute text**: the `statute_text` for each section is the corresponding IPC provision (offence + punishment).
## Sources & licensing
- **Court judgments** are Indian High Court decisions, redistributed here in reformatted, excerpted form under
**CC-BY-4.0** — see NOTICE for attribution. Indian court judgments are themselves public records
(Indian Copyright Act, 1957, §52(1)(q)).
- **IPC statute text** is the text of the Indian Penal Code, a public-domain enactment of the Government of India.
- **Curation** (citation extraction, masking, formatting) © 2026 Clause Logic Inc.
This dataset is released under **CC-BY-4.0**: free to use, including commercially, with attribution.
## Disclaimer
Provided "as is", without warranty of any kind. This dataset is for research and machine-learning purposes and does
**not** constitute legal advice.
|