Abstract: Background: Intravenous induction is a crucial part of anaesthesia. Laryngoscopy and intubation are noxious stimuli. Adverse cardiovascular events, arrhythmias, hemodynamic imbalance are alarming effects after intravenous injection of inducing agents in patients. Thus, the need to use a safer induction agent with lesser side effects. Objectives: This observational, cross sectional study is protocolised to compare hemodynamic response to induction with propofol and etomidate in patient posted for elective surgery. Methodology: Following approval from institutional ethics committee hundred & twenty (120) ASA I and II class patients of age group 20 to 60 years of either gender posted for elective surgical procedures requiring general anaesthesia will be enlisted for the study. Subjects will be randomly allocated into two groups of sixty (60) each, one group of subjects receiving propofol injection (2mg/kg) and the other injection etomidate (0.3 mg/kg) as inducing agent. Vitals will be recorded at six different intervals. Adverse effects like pain on injection, apnoea, myoclonus will be carefully observed and noted. Results: Both groups have similar demographic variables. It has been hypothesised that minimal changes in HR and MAP is noticed in patients induced with etomidate. Propofol group is expected to show greater incidence of pain on injection whereas etomidate grup is expected to show higher incidence of myoclonus. Conclusion: Etomidate is a better inducing agent than propofol with regard to their hemodynamic stability with lesser pain on injection.