Introduction of BNS 53
Section 53 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) talks about cases where a person encourages, helps, or provokes someone to do something, but the final result is different or more serious than what they originally intended. If the abettor knew that such a result was possible, they are still held responsible for it.
This provision makes sure that people cannot escape liability by saying, “I did not intend this result.” The focus of the law is on what actually happened, not only on what was planned.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 53 replaces the old Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 113.
What is section 53 of BNS ?
BNS Section 53 says that if someone helps or encourages another person to commit an act, and the result is different or worse than what was intended, the person who helped is still responsible for the unexpected result. This is true if they knew that the act could lead to that different result.
Liability of abettor bns 53
If an abettor (the one who instigates or helps) wants another person to commit a certain crime, but the other person commits the same kind of crime in a different way, the abettor is still responsible as if the crime was done exactly as he intended.
1. Meaning of Section 53
BNS Section 53 means that if a person helps, provokes, or encourages another to commit an offence with a particular intention, but the actual result turns out to be different from what was intended, the abettor is still responsible. The important point is that the abettor knew, or had reason to believe, that such a different result could happen.
21. Purpose of Section 53
The purpose of this section is to make sure that abettors cannot escape punishment by claiming, “I only intended this, not that.” If the harm that occurred was a natural or predictable outcome of the act, then the abettor must face liability. This ensures fairness and prevents misuse of loopholes in criminal law.
3. Responsibility for Different Results
The law gives importance to the actual harm caused, not just what the abettor wanted. If the abettor told someone to commit an offence, and that offence resulted in a different or more serious outcome, the abettor is equally liable for that outcome. This prevents abettors from limiting their responsibility to only the part they originally intended.
4. Knowledge of Risks
Liability under this section depends on whether the abettor knew or could reasonably foresee the possible result. If the abettor had knowledge that such harm might occur, he will be held responsible. But if the result was completely unusual or unforeseeable, the abettor may not be liable for that part.
5. Punishment for the Abettor
Even if the offence turns out differently, the punishment for the abettor will be the same as if he had intended that result. This is to ensure that abettors are not treated more leniently just because the crime took a different shape. The law places them on the same footing as the main offender.
6. Predictable Harm
This section is based on the principle of natural and probable consequences. If a result naturally flows from the act that was abetted, then the abettor is liable. For example, if someone abets a simple assault and it results in serious injury or death, the abettor is still responsible because such harm was a likely possibility.
7. Example to Understand
Suppose A encourages B to commit theft. While committing the theft, B ends up killing the house owner. Since A knew that resistance could happen during theft and violence was possible, A will also be liable for the killing, not just the theft. This shows how the law stretches responsibility to cover all foreseeable outcomes.
8. Importance of Section 53
This section is important because it ensures complete liability of abettors. It strengthens justice by making them answerable for the real consequences of their encouragement, not just their intentions. It also discourages people from getting involved in abetment by showing that they may be punished for all possible outcomes, even unintended ones.
BNS Section 53 in Simple Points
BNSS Section 53 explains that when a person abets (encourages, provokes, or helps) an act with a particular intention, but the act ends up causing a different result, the abettor is still responsible for the actual outcome. The law ensures that abettors cannot escape liability by saying, “I did not intend this result.” If the harm was predictable and foreseeable, they face the same punishment as if they had planned for that harm.
Key Explanations
1. Responsibility for Different Results
If you abet someone to do something with a particular effect in mind, but a different harm occurs, you are still responsible for that harm. The law does not only look at what you wanted but also at what actually happened.
2. Knowing the Risks
You will only be held liable if you knew or had reason to believe that such harm was a likely outcome of the act you encouraged. If the result was completely unforeseeable, liability may not apply.
3. Same Punishment for Different Results
Even if the actual result was not what you originally intended, you face the same punishment as if you had planned for that specific result. This ensures abettors cannot escape stricter penalties.
4. Predictable Harm
The section holds you accountable for any harm that was a natural or probable consequence of the act you abetted. If it was something any reasonable person could have foreseen, you are legally responsible.
5. Actual Harm Counts
The law gives importance to the real harm caused instead of the abettor’s personal intention. What matters is the effect that took place, not the effect the abettor wanted.
Important Legal Points
6. Different Result from Intended
If an abettor encouraged an act to achieve one result but another occurred, the abettor is still guilty of the result that actually happened.
7. Liability for Actual Effect
The abettor is accountable for the actual outcome, provided they knew that such an outcome was possible when they gave encouragement or assistance.
8. Same as Committed Offense
The punishment for the abettor will be the same as if they had abetted the result that actually occurred. For example, if someone abets a simple assault but it results in death, they may face the same punishment as for abetting culpable homicide.
9. Cognizable or Non-Cognizable
Whether the case is cognizable (police can register FIR and arrest without warrant) or non-cognizable depends on the nature of the actual offense committed.
10. Bailable or Non-Bailable & Court for Trial
Similarly, whether the case is bailable or non-bailable, and which court will try the case, depends on the seriousness and classification of the actual crime committed as a result of the abetment.
Comparison: BNS Section 53 vs IPC Section 113
| Section | Offense | Punishment | Bailable / Non-Bailable | Cognizable / Non-Cognizable | Trial By |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BNS Section 53 |
Liability of abettor when the effect caused by the act abetted is different from the intended one. Abettor is held responsible for the actual effect, if it was foreseeable. |
Same as punishment for the offence that actually occurred, depending on the specific case. | Depends on the nature of the offence actually committed. | Depends on the nature of the offence actually committed. | Court as per classification of the actual offence committed. |
| IPC Section 113 (Old) |
Similar provision where an abettor is liable if a different effect results from the act abetted. Liability applies if the outcome was a probable consequence. |
Same as punishment for the offence that actually occurred (similar to BNS, but with old terminology). | Depends on the offence committed. | Depends on the offence committed. | Court as per classification of the offence committed. |
BNS Section 53 FAQs
What does BNS Section 53 cover?
It covers cases where the result of a crime is different from what was intended by the person who helped commit it.
What if the outcome is worse than expected?
The person who helped is still responsible for the result if they knew it could happen.
Is the punishment the same for all outcomes?
The punishment depends on the specific offence and its outcome.
Conclusion
BNS Section 53 ensures that abettors cannot escape liability just because they intended a lesser offence. If the actual result was foreseeable and more serious, they are held responsible for it. This strengthens accountability in law by making sure that abettors face consequences for the real harm caused by their encouragement or assistance.
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.
Finished with BNS 53 ? Continue exploring the next provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Each section includes explanations, examples, and plain-language breakdowns for easy understanding.
- BNS Section 54 : Abettor present when offence is committed
- https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-section-54/
- 55 BNS : Abetment of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life
- https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/55-bns/
- BNS 56 : Abetment of offence punishable with imprisonment
https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-56/ - BNS 57 : Abetting commission of offence by the public or by more than ten persons.
- https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-section-57/
- BNS 58 : Concealing design to commit offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
- https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-section-58/
Full IPC Section List: https://marriagesolution.in/ipc-section-list
All Indian Law & Blogs: https://marriagesolution.in/indian-law/
Full BNSS Section List: https://marriagesolution.in/bnss_section-list