Introduction of BNS Section 264
264 BNS holds public servants accountable when they fail to carry out their legal duty to arrest or keep a person in custody. Whether the omission is intentional (e.g., accepting a bribe or deliberately turning a blind eye) or negligent (careless record-keeping, unlocked cells), Section 264 provides criminal sanctions. The law draws a clear distinction between willful misconduct and negligence by prescribing heavier penalties for deliberate omissions and lighter, restorative punishments for negligent lapses. This provision replaces IPC Section 225-A and reinforces the duty of custodial officers and other public servants to secure persons lawfully subject to arrest or confinement.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 264 replaces the old Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 225-A.
- Introduction of BNS Section 264
- What is BNS Section 264 ?
- BNS 264 in Simple Points
- Section 264 BNS Overview
- BNS 264 Punishment
- BNS 264 bailable or not ?
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 264
- BNS Section 264 FAQs
- If you need support with court proceedings or any other legal matters, don’t hesitate to reach out for assistance.
What is BNS Section 264 ?
BNS Section 264 deals with situations where a public servant legally bound to arrest or confine a person fails to do so, either on purpose or due to negligence. Punishments differ based on whether the failure was intentional or unintentional.
- Intentional omission: Punishable with imprisonment up to 3 years, a fine, or both.
- Negligent omission: Punishable with simple imprisonment up to 2 years, a fine, or both.
Under Section 264 of the bns act 2023
“If any public servant, who is legally bound to apprehend or confine a person, either intentionally or negligently omits to do so, or allows such person to escape, he shall be punished as provided in this section.”
1. Meaning of “Omission to Apprehend or Sufferance of Escape”
- This section deals with situations where public servants fail in their legal duty.
- It includes:
- Not arresting a person they are legally required to apprehend.
- Allowing someone in custody to escape either deliberately or by negligence.
- The act can be intentional (willful disobedience) or negligent (careless omission).
2. Who is Covered?
This section applies only to public servants, such as:
- Police officers responsible for arresting or detaining suspects.
- Jailers or prison wardens tasked with keeping prisoners in custody.
- Court officers directed to confine or secure accused persons.
- Any other officials legally bound to arrest, detain, or supervise custody.
3. Nature of the Offence
- Non-Cognizable → Police cannot arrest without prior court permission.
- Bailable → The accused has the right to apply for bail.
- Non-Compoundable → Cannot be settled privately; trial must proceed in court.
- Triable by →
- Intentional omission → Magistrate of the First Class.
- Negligent omission → Any Magistrate.
4. Examples of BNS Section 264
- Example 1 – Intentional Omission
A police officer deliberately accepts money from an accused and avoids arresting him. → Punishable with up to 3 years’ imprisonment, fine, or both. - Example 2 – Negligent Omission
A jailer forgets to secure a cell door properly, and a prisoner escapes. → Punishable with up to 2 years’ simple imprisonment, fine, or both. - Example 3 – Delay in Arrest
A constable carelessly fails to execute a valid arrest warrant on time, allowing the accused to flee. → Considered negligent omission.
5. Punishment under BNS Section 264
- Intentional Omission → Up to 3 years’ imprisonment, or fine, or both.
- Negligent Omission → Up to 2 years’ simple imprisonment, or fine, or both.
6. Importance of BNS Section 264
- Ensures public servants cannot shirk their legal duties.
- Distinguishes between intentional corruption/misconduct and simple negligence.
- Reinforces accountability in law enforcement and prison management.
- Protects the credibility of justice by penalizing both deliberate and careless failures.
- Prevents misuse of authority and ensures public trust in the legal system.
Section 264 BNS Overview
BNS Section 264 addresses situations where a public servant who is legally bound to arrest or confine someone fails to do so. The failure could be intentional, where the public servant deliberately allows the person to escape, or it could be negligent, where the failure is due to carelessness. In both cases, the public servant can face penalties, with the punishment being more severe if the omission was intentional.
10 Key Points of BNS Section 264
- Applicability to Public Servants
- This section only applies to public servants who are legally responsible for apprehending or confining certain individuals. It doesn’t apply to private citizens or other officials not designated to make arrests.
- Obligation to Arrest or Confine
- A public servant covered under this section has a legal duty to arrest or keep someone in confinement under specific situations, as outlined by law. This duty must be clear, and the public servant must be aware of their responsibility.
- Failure to Apprehend
- If a public servant who is required to arrest someone does not do so, they could be penalized. This failure to apprehend can mean not attempting to arrest the person or intentionally avoiding it when required.
- Sufferance of Escape
- In situations where a public servant has a person in confinement, if they allow or help the individual escape, it is also punishable under Section 264. This means any active or passive action that leads to someone’s escape can be charged.
- Intentional Omission
- When the public servant intentionally fails to apprehend or allows an escape knowingly, it is considered a deliberate act. This intentional omission is treated as a more severe offence with harsher punishment.
- Negligent Omission
- If the public servant fails in their duty due to negligence or carelessness, without intentional malice, it is still punishable, but the punishment is lighter compared to intentional omission.
- Punishment for Intentional Omission
- If the omission or sufferance of escape is intentional, the public servant can face imprisonment for up to three years, a fine, or both. This higher punishment reflects the serious nature of intentional disobedience of duty.
- Punishment for Negligent Omission
- For cases of negligent omission, the punishment includes simple imprisonment for up to two years, a fine, or both. This lighter punishment is because the act wasn’t deliberate but still involves a lack of care in duty.
- Non-Cognizable Offence
- Offences under this section are non-cognizable, meaning that the police cannot arrest the public servant without a warrant. This gives some procedural protection to public servants unless a court directs their arrest.
- Bailable and Triable by Magistrate
- Both intentional and negligent omissions under Section 264 are bailable offences, allowing the accused to obtain bail. Intentional cases are tried by a first-class magistrate, while negligent cases can be tried by any magistrate.
Examples of BNS Section 264
- Intentional Omission Example
- A police officer is responsible for keeping a prisoner in custody. The prisoner offers the officer a bribe, and the officer deliberately allows the prisoner to escape. This is an intentional omission because the officer knowingly disobeyed their duty for personal gain.
- Negligent Omission Example
- A public servant has the duty to arrest a person involved in a criminal case but delays taking action due to careless record-keeping. Due to this neglect, the person learns about the pending arrest and escapes. Here, the omission was due to negligence, not a deliberate act.
BNS 264 Punishment
- For Intentional Omission: Imprisonment for up to three years, a fine, or both.
- For Negligent Omission: Simple imprisonment for up to two years, a fine, or both.
BNS 264 bailable or not ?
BNS Section 264 is a bailable offence. This means the accused public servant can seek bail and does not have to remain in custody during the legal proceedings if bail is granted.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 264
| Key Points | Details |
|---|---|
| Section Number | BNS Section 264 |
| Offense Description | Omission by a public servant to apprehend or confine a person, or allowing escape — whether intentional or negligent. |
| Punishment |
|
| Cognizability | Non-cognizable — police require magistrate’s permission to arrest. |
| Bailability | Bailable — the accused public servant may obtain bail. |
| Trial Court |
|
| Equivalent IPC Section | IPC Section 225-A (old code) |
Comparison Table — BNS 264 vs IPC 225-A
| Point of Comparison | BNS Section 264 | IPC Section 225-A (old) |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Omission by a public servant to apprehend a person or suffering escape — covers both intentional and negligent failures where not otherwise provided. | Similar scope: omission or sufferance of escape by public servant where no other specific provision applies. |
| Mental element | Two strands — (a) **intentional omission** (willful neglect or collusion) and (b) **negligent omission** (careless lapses). Different penalties apply. | Same distinction between deliberate omission and negligence; IPC 225-A treated both, though BNS clarifies structure and penalties. |
| Punishment — Intentional | Imprisonment up to **3 years**, or fine, or both (for intentional omission/sufferance of escape). | Equivalently severe — up to 3 years (older IPC 225-A provided similar sanction for willful failures). |
| Punishment — Negligent | Simple imprisonment up to **2 years**, or fine, or both (for negligent omissions causing escape). | Same or similar — IPC 225-A distinguished negligent lapses with lighter punishment; BNS language is clearer. |
| Cognizability / Arrest | **Non-cognizable** — police generally need magistrate’s order to arrest (procedural protection for public servants). | Same: non-cognizable under IPC 225-A (arrest requires magistrate order in usual course). |
| Bailability | **Bailable** — accused public servant may apply for bail (both intentional and negligent categories are bailable under BNS, subject to facts). | Same practical position under the IPC: bailable, though courts consider facts and seriousness. |
| Trial Court | **Intentional** omissions — triable by Magistrate of the First Class. **Negligent** omissions — triable by any Magistrate. | IPC 225-A followed similar triability rules; BNS offers more explicit structure for triability by intent/negligence. |
| Key note | BNS modernises drafting and clarifies two separate strands (intentional vs negligent). Substantive penal consequences remain essentially aligned with IPC 225-A. | IPC 225-A is the older counterpart; BNS 264 keeps the core policy but streamlines language and court allocation. |
BNS Section 264 FAQs
What is the focus of BNS Section 264?
This section deals with public servants who fail to apprehend or confine individuals as required by law, either intentionally or negligently.
What is the maximum punishment for intentional omission under Section 264?
The maximum punishment for intentional omission is 3 years imprisonment, a fine, or both.
What is the punishment for negligent omission?
For negligence, the punishment is simple imprisonment of up to 2 years, a fine, or both.
Is BNS Section 264 bailable?
Yes, this section is bailable, meaning the accused public servant can apply for bail.
Is this offence cognizable or non-cognizable?
The offence under Section 264 is non-cognizable, so the police need court permission to arrest the accused.
Which court handles cases under BNS Section 264?
Intentional cases are tried by a Magistrate of the First Class, while negligent cases are tried by any Magistrate.
Conclusion
BNS Section 264 protects the rule of law by ensuring that those entrusted with custody and arrest powers cannot evade responsibility — whether through corruption or careless omission. By differentiating between intentional and negligent failures, the section balances deterrence with fairness: severe sanctions deter willful misconduct, while proportionate penalties for negligence encourage better training, procedures and documentation. For custodial authorities, robust protocols and meticulous record-keeping are the best safeguards; for accused public servants, prompt legal advice is essential because penalties and triability differ for intentional and negligent omissions.
Need Legal Support?
If you are dealing with court cases, marriage problems, or any other legal issue, our team at Marriage Solution – Lawyer Help is here for you. Simply fill out our quick online enquiry form, and we’ll connect you with the right legal expert to support your needs.