IPC · Chapter V · Of abetment

IPC section 109 in the BNS

IPC 109BNS 49

IPC section 109, “Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment”, is now BNS section 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in force from 1 July 2024.

What changed

From IPC 109 to BNS 49

Now BNS section 49, with the same rule. The illustration about bribing a public servant, which referred to the old IPC section 161, is dropped; the others are kept.

The official text

Old and new, side by side

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 109 Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment

Whoever abets any offence shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.

Explanation.—An act or offence is said to be committed in consequence of abetment, when it is committed in consequence of the instigation, or in pursuance of the conspiracy, or with the aid which constitutes the abetment.

(a) A offers a bribe to B, a public servant, as a reward for showing A some favour in the exercise of B's official functions. B accepts the bribe. A has abetted the offence defined in section 161.

(b) A instigates B to give false evidence. B, in consequence of the instigation, commits that offence. A is guilty of abetting that offence, and is liable to the same punishment as B.

(c) A and B conspire to poison Z. A, in pursuance of the conspiracy, procures the poison and delivers it to B in order that he may administer it to Z. B, in pursuance of the conspiracy, administers the poison to Z in A’s absence and thereby causes Z’s death. Here B is guilty of murder. A is guilty of abetting that offence by conspiracy, and is liable to the punishment for murder.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 49 Punishment of abetment if act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment

Whoever abets any offence shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Sanhita for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.

Illustrations.

(a) A instigates B to give false evidence. B, in consequence of the instigation, commits that offence. A is guilty of abetting that offence, and is liable to the same punishment as B.

(b) A and B conspire to poison Z. A, in pursuance of the conspiracy, procures the poison and delivers it to B in order that he may administer it to Z. B, in pursuance of the conspiracy, administers the poison to Z in A’s absence and thereby causes Z’s death. Here B is guilty of murder. A is guilty of abetting that offence by conspiracy, and is liable to the punishment for murder.

The texts are India Code’s. The amendment markers and footnotes of the official print are left out, so the old section reads as it stood when it was repealed; State amendments are not shown. The PDFs linked below carry the full history.

Old law or new?

Which one applies to a case

The BNS repealed the IPC from 1 July 2024 (section 358(1)). The repeal does not reach back: under section 358(2), penalties and punishments incurred for offences committed against the IPC still stand, and proceedings for them may be started, continued and enforced as if the IPC had not been repealed. An act done before 1 July 2024 is therefore dealt with under the IPC section; an act done on or after that date, under the BNS.