eCourtsIndia
IndiaCode Laws
Section179
The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Refusing to answer public servant authorized to question

Repealed From 01 Jan 1862 Act 45 of 1860 As on 16 Oct 2026

Act 45 of 1860 Ministry Home Affairs Enacted 06 Oct 1860 In force 01 Jan 1862 Cited by 14 provisions

This provision is repealed. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024. It is reproduced because conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with refusing to answer public servant authorized to question. Whoever, being legally bound to state the truth on any subject to any public servant, refuses to answer any question demanded of him touching that subject by such public servant in the exercise of the legal powers of such public servant, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which ma 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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.

Whoever, being legally bound to state the truth on any subject to any public servant, refuses to answer any question demanded of him

touching that subject by such public servant in the exercise of the legal powers of such public servant, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Section 179, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).

Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

BNS 214 Refusing to answer public servant authorised to question Text carried over almost unchanged 93%

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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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 14

  1. Armed Forces Tribunal Act s. 15 Jurisdiction, powers and authority in matters of appeal against court martial
  2. Maharashtra Police Act s. 22Q Powers and functions of State Police Complaints Authority
  3. Meghalaya Police Act, 2010 (Act No. 7 of 2011) s. 81 Powers of the Accountability Commission
  4. Mizoram Police Act s. 109 Powers of the Commission
  5. Sikkim Police Act s. 141
  6. Tripura Police Act s. 67 Powers of the Commission
  7. Uttar Pradesh Commission for Minorities Act s. 15 Penalty
  8. Uttar Pradesh Commission for Minorities Act s. 14
  9. Uttar Pradesh Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act s. 18 Penalty
  10. Uttar Pradesh Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act s. 18
  11. Uttar Pradesh State Commission for Backward Classes Act s. 18 Penalty
  12. Uttarakhand Minority Comission Act s. 4

and 2 more

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.

  1. K. Pramod Reddy vs The Assistant Director-pmla

    High Court 27 Apr 2012 Persuasive (Other High Court)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The Assistant Director of the Directorate of Enforcement, being duly appointed under the Central Government's Gazette Notification, is a competent authority to issue summons under Section 50(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. During the preliminary investigation stage, such summons is legal and not arbitrary. A person summoned for investigation is not yet an accused and therefore cannot claim absolute immunity from self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The person is bound to answer questions that do not materially incriminate him in pending or imminent investigations. The court should not intervene in the preliminary investigation stage of PMLA proceedings.

    On this section: Section 179 relates to refusal to answer public servant's questions. Sections 193 and 228 relate to giving false evidence and fabricating false evidence in judicial proceedings. Court noted that proceedings under PMLA Section 50 are deemed judicial proceedings under these sections.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

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.

Judgments citing this section

These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.

  1. High Court 27 Apr 2012 HBHC010302572011

    … If, after the whole examination is over, the officer concerned reasonably regards any refusal to answer to be a wilful violation under pretence of immunity from selfincrimination, he will be free to prosecute the alleged offender after studying the refusal to answer in the light of the principles we have set out. Section 179, Indian Penal Code should not be unsheathed too promiscuously and teasingly to tense lay people into vague consternation and covert compulsion although the proper office of S. 179, Indian Penal Code is perfectly within the constitutional limits of Art. 20 (3)." (emphasis is mine) In the said case, the …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

Questions about Section 179

What have the courts held on Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code?

K. Pramod Reddy vs The Assistant Director-pmla (27 Apr 2012) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Section 179 relates to refusal to answer public servant's questions. Sections 193 and 228 relate to giving false evidence and fabricating false evidence in judicial proceedings. Court noted that proceedings under PMLA Section 50 are deemed judicial proceedings under these sections.

How do I find court cases under Section 179 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 179, section 179 IPC, section 179 of the Indian Penal Code. 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 K. Pramod Reddy vs The Assistant Director-pmla (27 Apr 2012).

What should I read with Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?

14 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 214 (Refusing to answer public servant authorised to question), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.

When did Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?

Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 179, 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

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.