Indian Criminal Law | Updated 29 October 2026
IPC Section 202 and BNS Section 239: Intentional Omission to Give Information of an Offence
A person who knows or has reason to believe that an offence has been committed may be punished for deliberately withholding information about it only where the law requires that person to give the information. The historical rule was Section 202 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the corresponding current provision is Section 239 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
Meaning and scope of IPC Section 202
Section 202 IPC addressed the intentional omission to give information of an offence by a person bound to inform. It punished a person who, knowing or having reason to believe an offence had been committed, intentionally failed to communicate information respecting that offence which the person was legally obliged to provide.
Text of Section 202 IPC
Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, intentionally omits to give any information respecting that offence which he is legally bound to give, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
In this context, imprisonment of either description means simple or rigorous imprisonment, as permitted by law. The old IPC provision did not prescribe a specific maximum amount of fine in its text.
BNS Section 239: Corresponding current provision
Section 239 BNS retains the central elements of IPC Section 202: knowledge or reason to believe that an offence occurred, a legal duty to supply information, and intentional omission. The current text expressly limits the fine to Rs. 5,000.
Text of Section 239 BNS
Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, intentionally omits to give any information respecting that offence which he is legally bound to give, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
Read the official BNS chapter text and the government BNS reference document.
Essential ingredients of the offence
- An offence has been committed: The omission must concern information respecting an offence.
- Knowledge or reason to believe: The accused knew or had reason to believe the offence had occurred; mere unsupported suspicion is not necessarily enough.
- A legal obligation: A law must impose a duty on that person to supply the relevant information. Moral disapproval of silence alone is insufficient.
- Intentional omission: The failure to provide the required information must be deliberate rather than accidental or attributable to lack of knowledge.
The legal duty and its source must be identified in the particular case. Not every witness, bystander, or person aware of a crime automatically commits an offence under Section 239 merely by remaining silent.
Punishment and procedural classification
| Particular | IPC Section 202 | BNS Section 239 |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of offence | Intentional omission by a person legally bound to inform | Same core offence |
| Maximum imprisonment | Six months | Six months |
| Fine | Fine, or both (no specified ceiling in the section) | Up to Rs. 5,000, or both |
| Cognizability | Non-cognizable | Non-cognizable |
| Bail | Bailable | Bailable |
| Court | Any Magistrate | Any Magistrate |
The classification of BNS Section 239 is set out in the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). Non-cognizable generally means police cannot arrest without a warrant solely for that offence; bailable means bail is available as a statutory right subject to applicable procedure.
Illustrative example
Suppose a person is expressly required by an applicable law to report specified information about an offence to a competent authority. If that person knows the offence occurred and deliberately withholds the legally required information, the facts may attract BNS Section 239. Whether the section applies depends on the precise reporting obligation and the evidence of intentional omission.
Difference from related offences
IPC Section 201 / BNS Section 238 concerns causing evidence to disappear or giving false information with the intention of screening an offender. IPC Section 203 / BNS Section 240 concerns knowingly giving false information respecting an offence. By contrast, Section 202 IPC / Section 239 BNS targets deliberate failure to supply information that the law requires. Other reporting and public-servant provisions may apply depending on the facts.
Frequently asked questions
Is IPC Section 202 still in force for new offences?
The IPC was replaced by the BNS from 1 July 2024, subject to applicable transitional and savings provisions. BNS Section 239 is the corresponding provision for conduct governed by the new law.
Is BNS Section 239 bailable?
Yes. The BNSS First Schedule classifies the offence as bailable and non-cognizable, triable by any Magistrate.
What is the maximum punishment under BNS Section 239?
Imprisonment of either description for up to six months, or a fine up to Rs. 5,000, or both.
Does every person have a duty to report every crime?
No. This provision requires a specific legal obligation to provide the information. The applicable law and circumstances must be examined.
Official legal references
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: official chapter text
- BNSS First Schedule: classification of offences
- Bureau of Police Research and Development: BNS reference PDF
This article is general legal information. The governing statute, date of alleged conduct, legal reporting duty and case facts determine the applicable provision.
