Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 48
Abetment Outside India for Offence in India
Section 48 is the mirror image of Section 47: a person abets an offence within the meaning of the
Sanhita if, while outside India, they abet the commission of any act in India that would constitute
an offence if committed in India.
Please note: This page reflects our understanding of the law as of the date it was
last reviewed. Parliament, the State Legislatures, and the courts continue to amend and interpret
this law, and this page may not yet reflect the most recent change. Please verify the current text
of the law independently, and consult a licensed advocate for advice on your own matter, before
relying on this page.
Corresponding Provision Under Prior Law
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan
Portal), which itself marks Section 48 as a New Section,
and independently confirmed by searching the text of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for matching
language, which returned no result:
| BNS 48 | Covers | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|
| 48 | Abetment outside India for offence in India | No predecessor | No predecessor |
Old IPC Section 108A (BNS Section 47's predecessor) addressed only one direction of cross-border
abetment: abetment committed in India of an act committed outside India. It had no counterpart
addressing the reverse direction — abetment committed outside India of an act committed in
India. Section 48 is a genuinely new provision closing that gap.
Quick Reference
Section 48 is a definitional/jurisdictional provision — the reverse-direction counterpart to
Section 47, extending abetment liability to cover instigation, conspiracy, or aiding that happens
outside India but is directed at an act committed in India. It is not itself a stand-alone
punishable offence in the ordinary sense and carries no BNSS First Schedule entry or triable-court
classification of its own; the punishment applicable is that for abetment of the underlying offence.
What it requires: the abetting conduct (instigation, conspiracy, or aiding, as
defined in Section 45) occurs outside India, and it is directed at an act committed in India that
would constitute an offence if committed in India.
Effect where it applies: the abettor is treated as having abetted an offence within
the meaning of the Sanhita, even though the abetting conduct itself took place entirely outside
India.
Why this matters: just as Section 47 closes the gap for abetment originating in
India and directed abroad, Section 48 closes the reverse gap — someone abroad who instigates
or aids a crime to be committed in India can be held liable under the Sanhita for that abetment,
regardless of where they themselves were located.
Statutory Text (Verbatim)
A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Sanhita who, without and beyond India, abets the commission of any act in India which would constitute an offence if committed in India.
Illustration.
A, in country X, instigates B, to commit a murder in India, A is guilty of abetting murder.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Closing the reverse direction: abetment reaching into India from abroad
Explanation (Lexovia's Commentary)
This section is the deliberate mirror of Section 47, and together the two sections give the Sanhita's abetment provisions symmetrical reach across India's borders in both directions. Where Section 47 catches a person in India who instigates, conspires toward, or aids a crime carried out abroad, Section 48 catches a person located abroad who does the same for a crime carried out in India. This matters particularly for modern forms of remote abetment — instructions, encouragement, funding, or planning transmitted from outside the country toward an act to be carried out inside it — ensuring that the abettor's own physical location outside India does not by itself place them beyond the reach of Indian criminal law when the act they abetted was one that would be an offence here.
Illustration (Lexovia's Own Example)
While physically present in a foreign country, a person sends instructions and funds to an associate in India, directing the associate to commit an act of criminal mischief against a rival's property in India, and the associate carries out the act as instructed. Because the abetting conduct was directed at an act committed in India that would constitute an offence if committed in India, Section 48 treats the person abroad as guilty of abetting that offence, even though they themselves never set foot in India.
Want legal research on any topic or drafting? Order Now →
Related / Cross-Referenced Sections
Section 47 (Abetment in India of offences outside India), whose reverse-direction counterpart this
section is, and Section 46 (Abettor), whose definitions this section builds on.
FAQs
Is this a genuinely new provision, or does it restate something from the old IPC?
It is genuinely new — the concordance itself marks it as a "New Section," and no matching
provision appears anywhere in the text of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 that we searched.
Does the abettor need to ever enter India for this section to apply?
No, per the statute's own wording — the abetting conduct must occur "without and beyond
India," meaning outside India.
How does this section relate to Section 47?
The two sections are direct mirrors of each other: Section 47 covers abetment committed in
India of an act committed outside India, while Section 48 covers abetment committed outside India
of an act committed in India.
Spotted something that looks outdated because of a recent amendment, mismatched, or just a
typographical error?
Email us or
message us on Instagram
— it helps us keep this page accurate for everyone who reads it after you.