Section 313 punishes belonging to a gang that habitually commits theft or robbery, quite apart from proving any specific theft or robbery against the accused personally. It carves out gangs of dacoits, which are punished more severely under the separate dacoity provisions instead.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal) and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts. Section 313 is marked Exact correspondence — it maps directly onto one section of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860, carrying the same punishment and the same core ingredient:
| BNS 313 | Covers | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 313 | Punishment for belonging to gang of robbers, etc. | S.401 “Punishment for belonging to gang of thieves” | Exact |
A word-by-word comparison of the two texts shows three drafting differences. (1) IPC 401 begins “Whoever, at any time after the passing of this Act, shall belong to any wandering or other gang”; BNS 313 begins “Whoever belongs to any gang”, so the transitional words and the words “wandering or other” are not carried over. (2) IPC 401 says “associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery”; BNS 313 says “associated in habitually committing theft or robbery”. (3) IPC 401 excludes “a gang of thugs or dacoits”; BNS 313 excludes only “a gang of dacoits”, so the reference to thugs is not carried over. The punishment (rigorous imprisonment up to seven years, and liability to fine) is the same in both. The concordance classes the row as Exact; this page records the wording differences above as they stand in the two texts and does not go further than that.
Whoever belongs to any gang of persons associated in habitually committing theft or robbery, and not being a gang of dacoits, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Section 313 punishes mere membership in a gang that habitually commits theft or robbery — it does not require proof that the accused personally committed any specific theft or robbery on any specific occasion. The offence has three ingredients. First, there must be a “gang” — an associated group of persons, not a single individual acting alone. Second, the gang's association must be for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery, meaning theft or robbery is the group's recurring activity or common design, not a single joint venture. Third, the gang must not be “a gang of dacoits”. Dacoity is defined in Section 310(1) (five or more persons conjointly committing or attempting a robbery), and belonging to a gang associated for the purpose of habitually committing dacoity has its own, heavier punishment in Section 310(6) (imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment up to ten years, and liability to fine). Because this section's own words exclude “a gang of dacoits”, the two provisions are framed so that they do not overlap.
On the words of the section, the act punished is belonging to such a gang; the section does not list a particular theft or robbery by the accused as a separate ingredient. In ordinary terms, that makes it an offence of association rather than a single act of taking property, which is how it differs from theft (Section 303) and robbery (Section 309) themselves. The section says the offender “shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine”: rigorous imprisonment up to seven years is the prescribed punishment, and a fine may be added (“liable to fine”), rather than being the only punishment.
On the words of the section, the offence is belonging to the gang itself: “Whoever belongs to any gang of persons associated in habitually committing theft or robbery”. A particular theft or robbery by the accused is not listed as a separate ingredient; what the section requires is that the accused belongs to such a gang. How that is proved in a given case is a matter of evidence and is not addressed here.
Numbers and conduct. Dacoity requires five or more persons conjointly committing or attempting a robbery (Section 310(1)), and belonging to a gang associated for the purpose of habitually committing dacoity is punished separately and more severely under Section 310(6). Section 313's own words exclude “a gang of dacoits”, so it covers gangs associated in habitually committing theft or robbery that are not gangs of dacoits.
The section's words are “any gang of persons associated in habitually committing theft or robbery”. It does not mention registration, a name or a hierarchy, and “gang” is not defined in Section 2 of the BNS, so the ordinary meaning of the word applies; whether a particular group qualifies depends on whether it fits those words.