IPC 108→BNS 46

IPC 108 to BNS 46: Abettor

Section 108 IPC (1860) replaced by Section 46 BNS (2023)

View IPC Section 108 →View BNS Section 46 →

IPC 108 to BNS 46 at a Glance

Section 108 IPC (Abettor) is now Section 46 BNS, in force from 1 July 2024. What changed is set out below.

What Changed From IPC 108 to BNS 46?

Section 108 IPC is replaced by Section 46 BNS. In the first illustration to Explanation 3, the word lunatic is replaced by person of unsound mind. In the third illustration to Explanation 3, the phrase the unsoundness of his mind becomes his unsoundness of mind. The definition and all five Explanations are otherwise unchanged.

IPC 108 vs BNS 46: Comparison Table

AspectIPC 1860 (repealed)BNS 2023 (in force)
Section10846
OffenceAbettorSame
PunishmentNone of its own. Section 109 to Section 117 IPC punish abetment of an offence according to the offence abetted and whether it is committed.None of its own. Section 49 to Section 57 BNS punish abetment of an offence according to the offence abetted and whether it is committed.
FineNone of its own. Any fine comes from the section that punishes the abetment.Same
BailNon-BailableSame
CognizanceNon-CognizableSame
CompoundableNon-CompoundableSame

IPC 108 and BNS 46: Bare Act Text Side by Side

IPC 1860 (repealed)

Section 108, IPC 1860

108. Abettor.—A person abets an offence, who abets either the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor. Explanation 1.—The abetment of the illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor may not himself be bound to do that act. Explanation 2.—To constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused. Illustrations (a) A instigates B to murder C. B refuses to do so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit murder. (b) A instigates B to murder D. B in pursuance of the instigation stabs D. D recovers from the wound. A is guilty of instigating B to commit murder. Explanation 3.—It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. Illustrations (a) A, with a guilty intention, abets a child or a lunatic to commit an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence, and having the same intention as A. Here A, whether the act be committed or not, is guilty of abetting an offence. (b) A, with the intention of murdering Z, instigates B, a child under seven years of age, to do an act which causes Z's death. B, in consequence of the abetment, does the act in the absence of A and thereby causes Z's death. Here, though B was not capable by law of committing an offence, A is liable to be punished in the same manner as if B had been capable by law of committing an offence, and had committed murder, and he is therefore subject to the punishment of death. (c) A instigates B to set fire to a dwelling-house. B, in consequence of the unsoundness of his mind, being incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is wrong or contrary to law, sets fire to the house in consequence of A's instigation. B has committed no offence, but A is guilty of abetting the offence of setting fire to a dwelling-house, and is liable to the punishment provided for that offence. (d) A, intending to cause a theft to be committed, instigates B to take property belonging to Z out of Z's possession. A induces B to believe that the property belongs to A. B takes the property out of Z's possession, in good faith, believing it to be A's property. B, acting under this misconception, does not take dishonestly, and therefore does not commit theft. But A is guilty of abetting theft, and is liable to the same punishment as if B had committed theft. Explanation 4.—The abetment of an offence being an offence, the abetment of such an abetment is also an offence. Illustration A instigates B to instigate C to murder Z. B accordingly instigates C to murder Z, and C commits that offence in consequence of B's instigation. B is liable to be punished for his offence with the punishment for murder; and, as A instigated B to commit the offence, A is also liable to the same punishment. Explanation 5.—It is not necessary to the commission of the offence of abetment by conspiracy that the abettor should concert the offence with the person who commits it. It is sufficient if he engages in the conspiracy in pursuance of which the offence is committed. Illustration A concerts with B a plan for poisoning Z. It is agreed that A shall administer the poison. B then explains the plan to C mentioning that a third person is to administer the poison, but without mentioning A's name. C agrees to procure the poison, and procures and delivers it to B for the purpose of its being used in the manner explained. A administers the poison; Z dies in consequence. Here, though A and C have not conspired together, yet C has been engaged in the conspiracy in pursuance of which Z has been murdered. C has therefore committed the offence defined in this section and is liable to the punishment for murder.
BNS 2023 (in force)

Section 46, BNS 2023

A person abets an offence, who abets either the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor. Explanation 1.—The abetment of the illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor may not himself be bound to do that act. Explanation 2.—To constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence should be caused. Illustrations. (a) A instigates B to murder C. B refuses to do so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit murder. (b) A instigates B to murder D. B in pursuance of the instigation stabs D. D recovers from the wound. A is guilty of instigating B to commit murder. Explanation 3.—It is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence, or that he should have the same guilty intention or knowledge as that of the abettor, or any guilty intention or knowledge. Illustrations. (a) A, with a guilty intention, abets a child or a person of unsound mind to commit an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence, and having the same intention as A. Here A, whether the act be committed or not, is guilty of abetting an offence. (b) A, with the intention of murdering Z, instigates B, a child under seven years of age, to do an act which causes Z’s death. B, in consequence of the abetment, does the act in the absence of A and thereby causes Z’s death. Here, though B was not capable by law of committing an offence, A is liable to be punished in the same manner as if B had been capable by law of committing an offence, and had committed murder, and he is therefore subject to the punishment of death. (c) A instigates B to set fire to a dwelling-house. B, in consequence of his unsoundness of mind, being incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is wrong or contrary to law, sets fire to the house in consequence of A’s instigation. B has committed no offence, but A is guilty of abetting the offence of setting fire to a dwelling-house, and is liable to the punishment provided for that offence. (d) A, intending to cause a theft to be committed, instigates B to take property belonging to Z out of Z’s possession. A induces B to believe that the property belongs to A. B takes the property out of Z’s possession, in good faith, believing it to be A’s property. B, acting under this misconception, does not take dishonestly, and therefore does not commit theft. But A is guilty of abetting theft, and is liable to the same punishment as if B had committed theft. Explanation 4.—The abetment of an offence being an offence, the abetment of such an abetment is also an offence. Illustration. A instigates B to instigate C to murder Z. B accordingly instigates C to murder Z, and C commits that offence in consequence of B’s instigation. B is liable to be punished for his offence with the punishment for murder; and, as A instigated B to commit the offence, A is also liable to the same punishment. Explanation 5.—It is not necessary to the commission of the offence of abetment by conspiracy that the abettor should concert the offence with the person who commits it. It is sufficient if he engages in the conspiracy in pursuance of which the offence is committed. Illustration. A concerts with B a plan for poisoning Z. It is agreed that A shall administer the poison. B then explains the plan to C mentioning that a third person is to administer the poison, but without mentioning A’s name. C agrees to procure the poison, and procures and delivers it to B for the purpose of its being used in the manner explained. A administers the poison; Z dies in consequence. Here, though A and C have not conspired together, yet C has been engaged in the conspiracy in pursuance of which Z has been murdered. C has therefore committed the offence defined in this section and is liable to the punishment for murder.

Ingredients: IPC 108 vs BNS 46

Under IPC 108
  1. Abetting either the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an offence if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor
  2. The abetment may be of the illegal omission of an act although the abettor may not himself be bound to do that act under Explanation 1
  3. Under Explanation 2, the act abetted need not actually be committed, nor must the effect necessary to constitute the offence be caused
  4. The person abetted need not be capable by law of committing an offence, or possess the same guilty intention or knowledge, or any guilty intention or knowledge under Explanation 3
  5. The abetment of an abetment is also an offence under Explanation 4, and an abettor by conspiracy need not concert the offence with the perpetrator under Explanation 5
Under BNS 46
  1. Abetting either the commission of an offence or an act which would be an offence if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge
  2. Abetment of an illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor is not bound to do that act under Explanation 1
  3. The act abetted need not be committed, nor the effect requisite to constitute the offence caused under Explanation 2
  4. The person abetted need not be capable by law of committing an offence, nor possess the same guilty intention or knowledge, or any guilty intention or knowledge under Explanation 3
  5. Abetment of an abetment is an offence under Explanation 4, and an abettor by conspiracy need not concert the offence with the person who commits it under Explanation 5

What IPC 108 to BNS 46 Means for Pending Cases

For Section 108 IPC (now Section 46 BNS): under Section 46 BNS, the definition of an abettor and its five Explanations are unchanged in substance. A charge for an act done after the BNS came into force cites Section 46 BNS and is framed on the same elements as before.

FAQs: IPC 108 to BNS 46

What changed from Section 108 IPC in Section 46 BNS?▼

Section 46 BNS substitutes person of unsound mind for lunatic in the first illustration to Explanation 3, and changes the unsoundness of his mind to his unsoundness of mind in the third illustration. The legal principles across the five explanations are preserved without substantive change.

Where does Section 108 IPC sit in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?▼

It sits in Section 46 BNS, in Chapter IV, Of Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy and Attempt.

Does Section 108 IPC or Section 46 BNS apply to an act done before 1 July 2024?▼

Section 108 IPC. Section 358 BNS repealed the IPC from 1 July 2024 but saves any liability already incurred under it, so an act done before that date is still dealt with under Section 108 IPC. Section 46 BNS governs acts done on or after 1 July 2024.

Disclaimer: This comparison is for informational purposes only. The new criminal laws came into effect on 1 July 2024. Consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 · Last updated: 16 Oct 2026 ·