Wrongful confinement
Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with wrongful confinement. Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said “wrongfully to confine” that person. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said “wrongfully to confine” that person.
Illustrations.
(a) A causes Z to go within a walled space, and locks Z in. Z is thus prevented from proceeding in any direction beyond the circumscribing line of wall. A wrongfully confines Z.
(b) A places men with firearms at the outlets of a building, and tells Z that they will fire at Z if Z attempts to leave the building. A wrongfully confines Z.
(2) Whoever wrongfully confines any person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
(3) Whoever wrongfully confines any person for three days, or more, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both.
(4) Whoever wrongfully confines any person for ten days or more, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten thousand rupees.
(5) Whoever keeps any person in wrongful confinement, knowing that a writ for the liberation of that person has been duly issued, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years in addition to any term of imprisonment to which he may be liable under any other section of this Chapter and shall also be liable to fine.
(6) Whoever wrongfully confines any person in such manner as to indicate an intention that the confinement of such person may not be known to any person interested in the person so confined, or to any public servant, or that the place of such confinement may not be known to or discovered by any such person or public servant as hereinbefore mentioned, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years in addition to any other punishment to which he may be liable for such wrongful confinement and shall also be liable to fine.
(7) Whoever wrongfully confines any person for the purpose of extorting from the person confined, or from any person interested in the person confined, any property or valuable security or of constraining the person confined or any person interested in such person to do anything illegal or to give any information which may facilitate the commission of an offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(8) Whoever wrongfully confines any person for the purpose of extorting from the person confined or any person interested in the person confined any confession or any information which may lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of constraining the person confined or any person interested in the person confined to restore or to cause the restoration of any property or valuablesecurity or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give information which may lead to the restoration of any property or valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 127, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 340 Wrongful confinement Text carried over almost unchanged 90%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
How this offence is classified
From the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which classifies every offence under the Sanhita. Cognizable means a police officer may arrest without warrant; bailable means bail is a matter of right rather than of the court's discretion. This section is classified 7 ways.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongfully confining any person. | Imprisonment for 1 year, or fine of 5,000 rupees, or both. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Wrongfully confining for three or more days. | Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine of 10,000 rupees, or both. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Wrongfully confining for 10 or more days. | Imprisonment for 5 years and fine of 10,000 rupees. | Cognizable. | Non-bailable. | Magistrate of the first class. |
| Keeping any person in wrongful confinement, knowing that a writ has been issued for his liberation. | Imprisonment for 2 years in addition to any term of imprisonment to under any other section and fine. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Magistrate of the first class. |
| Wrongful confinement in secret. | Imprisonment for 3 years in addition to other punishment which he is liable to and fine. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Magistrate of the first class. |
| Wrongful confinement for the purpose of extorting property, or constraining to an illegal act, etc. | Imprisonment for 3 years and fine. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Wrongful confinement for the purpose of extorting confession or information, or for compelling restoration of property, etc. | Imprisonment for 3 years and fine. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Subhash Krishnan vs State of Goa
Decided under Indian Penal Code 340, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal trials involving identification evidence, when multiple independent eyewitnesses positively identify the accused in court with specific reference to identifying features (such as distinctive clothing) and distinctive acts performed during the crime, and when such in-court identification is corroborated by: (a) participation in prior test identification parade conducted within reasonable time of occurrence (24 days) where accused did not challenge procedures; (b) recovery of vehicle and weapons linked to appellant; (c) credible evidence of previous acquaintance supporting enduring impress of identity; (d) consistent medical/forensic evidence; and (e) circumstances of arrest at scene with weapons, the absence of formal cross-examination of key witness (due to unavoidable circumstances) or initial non-mention in complaint does not vitiate the trial or conviction. The purpose of investigation is to set law in motion and collect evidence; if investigative procedures are thereafter followed lawfully and evidence collected is sufficiently corroborated, conviction can be upheld despite technical defects in initiation of investigation.
On this section: Wrongful confinement - interpreted to include restraint of unconscious person who is prevented from proceeding in any direction due to incapacity caused by criminal force
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 127
What have the courts held on Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Subhash Krishnan vs State of Goa (17 Aug 2012) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 340, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Wrongful confinement - interpreted to include restraint of unconscious person who is prevented from proceeding in any direction due to incapacity caused by criminal force.
Is Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Bailable, on a first conviction, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This section is classified 7 ways; all of them are set out on this page.
Is Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Any Magistrate.
How do I find court cases under Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNS 127, section 127 BNS, section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 127 2 section in hindi and bns 127(6) in hindi. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Subhash Krishnan vs State of Goa (17 Aug 2012).
What should I read with Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward IPC 340 (Wrongful confinement), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 127, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions2199 words
- 356. Defamation1543 words
- 335. Making a false document1318 words
- 101. Murder1177 words
- 303. Theft1104 words
- 3. General explanations858 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.