Section 163
Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Rep. by the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), s. The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Rep. by the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), s. 31.
Section 163, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
No provision of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is textually close to this one. No close match found
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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 5
- Central Provinces Court of Wards Act s. 19 Liabilities, etc., of managers and other servants of Court of Wards
- Indian Telegraph Act s. 31 Bribery
- Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (Central Act 13 of 1885) s. 31 Bribery
- Kerala Court of Wards Act, 1967 (President's Act No.3 of 1967) s. 63 Repeal
- Tamil Nadu Court of Wards Act s. 30
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.
-
Priyanka Srivastava vs State of U. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving Section 156(3) CrPC applications, particularly in commercial disputes and debt recovery matters where statutory alternative remedies exist under special statutes like SARFAESI Act and Recovery of Debts due to Banks Act, a Magistrate must exercise strict judicial application of mind before ordering investigation. The Magistrate must: (1) Consider allegations in their entirety and nature, (2) Evaluate whether allegations remotely disclose cognizable offence, (3) Assess whether forwarding to police is conducive to justice, (4) Note dates of incidents and any abnormal delays in reporting, (5) Conduct preliminary enquiry in commercial dispute categories to verify credibility, (6) Consider legislative protections afforded to secured creditors under special acts like Section 32 SARFAESI Act, (7) Be vigilant against abuse of Section 156(3) as tool for harassment and extracting settlements. Mere mechanical order 'as per application' without stated reasons is erroneous. Applications under Section 156(3) should be supported by sworn affidavit from applicant, making applicant accountable for false allegations under Section 191 IPC. FIR registration, while mandatory under Section 154 upon cognizable offence information, does not mandate investigation if preliminary enquiry reveals lack of credibility. Criminal proceedings cannot be used to pressure financial institutions into favorable settlements in debt disputes where statutory forums (DRT/DRAT) exist for resolution.
On this section: Offences alleged in initial complaint against bank officials; Court analyzed whether allegations disclosed commission of these offences; found allegations lacked basis
-
State of Uttarakhand vs Yogendra Nath Arora
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The authority competent to grant prosecution sanction under Section 19(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for a public servant accused of corruption is the authority competent to remove the public servant from service, not merely from a particular office. In the case of a deputed employee, where the power to repatriate is distinct from the power to remove from service, only the authority possessing the power to remove from service (typically the parent organization) is competent to grant prosecution sanction, even if the corrupt act was committed while performing duties for the deputing organization. Repatriation constitutes a change of posting or transfer, not removal from office within the meaning of Section 19(1)(c).
On this section: Taking gratification for exercise of official influence; cited for aiding and abetting analysis
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 163
What have the courts held on Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code?
Priyanka Srivastava vs State of U. P. (19 Mar 2015) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Offences alleged in initial complaint against bank officials; Court analyzed whether allegations disclosed commission of these offences; found allegations lacked basis. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2015.
How do I find court cases under Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code?
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: IPC 163, section 163 IPC, section 163 of the Indian Penal Code. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Priyanka Srivastava vs State of U. P. (19 Mar 2015).
What should I read with Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
5 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it.
When did Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 163 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 163, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.