Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 55

Abetment of Offence Punishable With Death or Imprisonment for Life, If Offence Not Committed

Section 55 punishes abetment of a very serious offence — one punishable with death or imprisonment for life — even where the offence abetted is never actually committed, provided no other express provision in the Sanhita already punishes that abetment. The base punishment is imprisonment of either description up to seven years plus fine; if, in consequence of the abetment, an act is done that causes hurt to any person, the punishment rises to imprisonment of either description up to fourteen years plus fine.

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) and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts. Section 55 is marked Exact correspondence:

BNS 55	Covers	IPC, 1860 equivalent	Category
55	Abetment of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, if offence not committed	S.115 (identical in substance; "made by this Code" now reads "made under this Sanhita")	Exact

Comparing the bare text directly, BNS Section 55 reproduces old IPC Section 115 word-for-word, including its illustration, with the only differences being the reference to "this Sanhita" in place of "this Code", and the accompanying change from "made by this Code" to "made under this Sanhita" — naming and drafting changes consistent with the new Act's own title, not substantive changes.

Quick Reference

Section 55 is a punishment provision for a specific category of abetment — abetting an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is classified as follows in the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), quoted as that Schedule words each entry:

(base): punishment — “Imprisonment for 7 years and fine.” · cognizable or non-cognizable — “According as offence abetted is cognizable or non-cognizable.” · bailable or non-bailable — “Non-bailable.” · triable by — “Court by which offence abetted is triable.”
(if an act which causes harm be done in consequence of the abetment): punishment — “Imprisonment for 14 years and fine.” · cognizable or non-cognizable — “According as offence abetted is cognizable or non-cognizable.” · bailable or non-bailable — “Non-bailable.” · triable by — “Court by which offence abetted is triable.”
Compoundable: Not listed in either compounding table of BNSS S.359. (Separately, BNSS S.359(3) provides that where an offence is compoundable under that section, the abetment of that offence may be compounded in like manner.)

The Schedule words this entry as “Imprisonment for 7 years and fine” and “Imprisonment for 14 years and fine”; the section's own text says a term “which may extend to” that period, and the section's own text governs (the Schedule states that its entries are “merely as indication of the substance of the section”).

What it requires: the accused abetted the commission of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life; that offence was not actually committed in consequence of the abetment; and no other express provision in the Sanhita already punishes that particular abetment.
Base punishment: imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and fine.
Enhanced punishment: if any act for which the abettor is liable in consequence of the abetment, and which causes hurt to any person, is actually done, imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and fine.

Statutory Text (Verbatim)

Whoever abets the commission of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, shall, if that offence be not committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made under this Sanhita for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if any act for which the abettor is liable in consequence of the abetment, and which causes hurt to any person, is done, the abettor shall be liable to imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Illustration.
A instigates B to murder Z. The offence is not committed. If B had murdered Z, he would have been subject to the punishment of death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, A is liable to imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and also to a fine; and if any hurt be done to Z in consequence of the abetment, he will be liable to imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and to fine.

Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.

Explanation & Illustration (Lexovia's Commentary — Not Statutory Text)

A gap-filling abetment offence, with an escalation for actual hurt caused

Explanation (Lexovia's Commentary)

This section exists to punish the abetment itself, as a wrong in its own right, even where the gravely serious offence that was abetted — one carrying death or life imprisonment — never actually happens. It only applies where no other express provision in the Sanhita already covers that particular abetment, so it operates as a residual, gap-filling offence rather than overlapping with more specific abetment provisions. The statute builds in an internal escalation: if the abetment goes further and some act connected with it actually causes hurt to a person (even though the ultimate offence abetted, such as murder, was not itself committed), the maximum punishment roughly doubles, from seven years to fourteen years. This reflects a graduated approach — the mere abetment of a very grave offence is itself punished, but the punishment is calibrated upward once real, if lesser, harm has actually resulted.

Illustration (Lexovia's Own Example)

A instigates B to poison Z with the intention of killing him. Acting on the instigation, B mixes a small quantity of poison into Z's food, but the dose turns out to be too weak to kill and instead only makes Z seriously ill for a few days. Z does not die, so the offence of murder that A abetted was never committed. Because an act connected with the abetment nonetheless caused hurt to Z, A is liable under Section 55 to imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and fine, rather than the lesser seven-year maximum that would apply had no hurt at all resulted.

Want legal research on any topic or drafting? Order Now →

Related / Cross-Referenced Sections

FAQs

Can a person be punished for abetting murder even if the murder never happened?

Yes. Section 55 punishes the abetment itself, up to seven years' imprisonment and fine, even where the abetted offence — here, one punishable with death or life imprisonment — was never actually committed.

Why does the punishment increase to fourteen years in some cases?

If an act connected with the abetment is actually done and it causes hurt to any person, the maximum punishment rises from seven to fourteen years, reflecting the real harm that resulted even though the ultimate offence abetted was not committed.

Does this section apply if another provision of the Sanhita already punishes the same abetment?

No. Section 55 applies only where no express provision is otherwise made under the Sanhita for the punishment of that abetment; it is a residual, gap-filling offence.