IPC · Chapter XI · Of false evidence and offences against public justice

IPC section 216 in the BNS

IPC 216BNS 253

IPC section 216, “Harbouring offender who has escaped from custody or whose apprehension has been ordered”, is now BNS section 253 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in force from 1 July 2024.

What changed

From IPC 216 to BNS 253

Now BNS section 253, with the three grades of punishment set out as clauses (a) to (c). Same punishments; the Exception now covers harbouring by the offender’s “spouse” (IPC: husband or wife).

The official text

Old and new, side by side

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 216 Harbouring offender who has escaped from custody or whose apprehension has been ordered

Whenever any person convicted of a charged with an offence, being in lawful custody for that offence, escapes from such custody, or whenever a public servant, in the exercise of the lawful powers of such public servant, orders a certain person to be apprehended for an offence, whoever, knowing of such escape or order for apprehension, harbours or conceals that person with the intention of preventing him from being apprehended, shall be punished in the manner following, that is to say, if a capital offence.—if the offence for which the person was in custody or is ordered to be apprehended is punishable with death, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine;

if punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment.—if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, with or without fine;

and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year and not to ten years, he shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for such offence, or with fine, or with both.

“Offence” in this section includes also any act or omission of which a person is alleged to have been guilty out of India, which, if he had been guilty of it in India, would have been punishable as an offence, and for which he is, under any law relating to extradition, or otherwise, liable to be apprehended or detained in custody in India, and every such act or omission shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be punishable as if the accused person had been guilty of it in India.

Exception.—The provision does not extend to the case in which the harbour or concealment is by the husband or wife of the person to be apprehended.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 253 Harbouring offender who has escaped from custody or whose apprehension has been ordered

Whenever any person convicted of or charged with an offence, being in lawful custody for that offence, escapes from such custody, or whenever a public servant, in the exercise of the lawful powers of such public servant, orders a certain person to be apprehended for an offence, whoever, knowing of such escape or order for apprehension, harbours or conceals that person with the intention of preventing him from being apprehended, shall be punished in the manner following, namely:—

(a) if the offence for which the person was in custody or is ordered to be apprehended is punishable with death, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine;

(b) if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, with or without fine;

(c) if the offence is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year and not to ten years, he shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for such offence, or with fine, or with both.

Explanation.—“Offence” in this section includes also any act or omission of which a person is alleged to have been guilty out of India, which, if he had been guilty of it in India, would have been punishable as an offence, and for which he is, under any law relating to extradition, or otherwise, liable to be apprehended or detained in custody in India, and every such act or omission shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be punishable as if the accused person had been guilty of it in India.

Exception.—The provisions of this section do not extend to the case in which the harbour or concealment is by the spouse of the person to be apprehended.

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.