Kidnapping or maiming a minor for purposes of begging
IPC 363A (Kidnapping or maiming a minor for purposes of begging) corresponds most closely to BNS 139, Kidnapping or maiming a child for purposes of begging, on a text comparison scoring 82 per cent. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed with effect from 01 Jul 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Repealed · Indian Penal Code
Section 363A Kidnapping or maiming a minor for purposes of begging
(1) Whoever kidnaps any minor or, not being the lawful guardian of a minor, obtains the custody of the minor, in order that such minor may be employed or used for the purposes of begging shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Whoever maims any minor in order that such minor may be employed or used for the purposes of begging shall be punishable with imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
(3) Where any person, not being the lawful guardian of a minor, employs or uses such minor for the purposes of begging, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that he kidnapped or otherwise obtained the custody of that minor in order that the minor might be employed or used for the purposes of begging.
(4) In this section,-
(a) "begging" means-
(i) soliciting or receiving alms in a public place, whether under the pretence of singing, dancing, fortunetelling, performing tricks or selling articles or otherwise;
(ii) entering on any private premises for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms;
(iii) exposing or exhibiting, with the object of obtaining or extorting alms, any sore, wound, injury, deformity or disease, whether of himself or of any other person or of an animal;
(iv) using a minor as an exhibit for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms;
(b) "minor" means-
(i) in the case of a male, a person under sixteen years of age; and
(ii) in the case of a female, a person under eighteen years of age.]
In force · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Section 139 Kidnapping or maiming a child for purposes of begging
(1) Whoever kidnaps any child or, not being the lawful guardian of such child, obtains the custody of the child, in order that such child may be employed or used for the purposes of begging shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Whoever maims any child in order that such child may be employed or used for the purposes of begging shall be punishable with imprisonment which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person s natural life, and with fine.
(3) Where any person, not being the lawful guardian of a child employs or uses such child for the purposes of begging, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that he kidnapped or otherwise obtained the custody of such child in order that such child might be employed or used for the purposes of begging.
(4) In this section "begging" means---
(i) soliciting or receiving alms in a public place, whether under the pretence of singing, dancing, fortune telling, performing tricks or selling articles or otherwise;
(ii) entering on any private premises for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms;
(iii) exposing or exhibiting, with the object of obtaining or extorting alms, any sore, wound, injury, deformity or disease, whether of himself or of any other person or of an animal;
(iv) using such child as an exhibit for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms.
Other provisions with similar text
The next closest matches, in order. Where a provision was split or merged, the answer is often more than one of these.
How this table was made, and what it is not
There is no official machine-readable correspondence between the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Ministry published comparison charts for human readers; nothing exists that a computer can check. So this is not an official mapping and we do not present it as one.
What it measures is how alike the text of two provisions is. For each provision of the old enactment we compare its words against every provision of the new one and report the closest, with the score. That works here because the new codes are largely a renumbering rather than a rewrite: where a provision carried over near-verbatim the match is self-evidencing, and you can see it for yourself, because both texts are set out side by side on every entry.
Where the law genuinely changed, the score falls and the entry says no close match found rather than offering a guess. Those entries matter: they are where the reform actually did something.
Check before you cite. A high score means the words are alike, not that a court has held the provisions equivalent. For that, read both texts and the Gazette.
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. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.