Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Section 262 – Resistance or obstruction by a person to his lawful apprehension

Whoever intentionally offers any resistance or illegal obstruction to the lawful apprehension of himself for any offence with which he is charged or of which he has been convicted, or escapes or attempts to escape from any custody in which he is lawfully detained for any such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Explanation. — The punishment in this section is in addition to the punishment for which the person to be apprehended or detained in custody was liable for the offence with which he was charged, or of which he was convicted.

Simplified Explanation

Section 262 deals with actions taken by an individual to resist or obstruct their lawful apprehension or to escape from lawful custody. This provision aims to deter individuals from interfering with the justice process by resisting arrest or escaping detention.

Key Components of Section 262

1. Who is Covered?
   • Any person:
     • Charged with an offense (awaiting trial).
     • Convicted of an offense (sentenced or serving a sentence).
     • Lawfully detained in custody (under court orders or detention protocols).
2. Actions Addressed:
   • Resistance or Obstruction:
     • Intentionally resisting lawful apprehension for an offense.
     • Illegally obstructing the process of being taken into custody.
   • Escape or Attempt to Escape:
     • Escaping or attempting to escape from custody where the person is lawfully detained.

Punishment

• Imprisonment:
  • Up to two years (rigorous or simple).
• Fine:
  • As determined by the court.
• Both:
  • The court may impose both imprisonment and a fine, based on the severity of the resistance or escape attempt.

Explanation in the Section

The explanation clarifies that this punishment is separate and additional to the punishment already associated with the offense for which the person was charged or convicted. This ensures accountability for the act of resistance or escape in addition to the original crime.

Purpose of the Section

1. To Prevent Obstruction of Justice:
   • Lawful apprehension is a critical part of enforcing justice. Resistance or obstruction undermines this process and must be penalized.
2. To Deter Escape Attempts:
   • The provision discourages individuals from escaping custody, emphasizing that such acts will lead to additional punishment.
3. To Maintain Law and Order:
   • Ensures that individuals comply with lawful procedures without interference.

Examples of Applicability

1. A person charged with theft physically resists arrest by police officers during a lawful apprehension.
2. An individual convicted of a crime attempts to break free from a police escort while being taken to prison.
3. A detainee escapes from lawful custody by overpowering the guards or exploiting negligence.

In these cases, Section 262 applies because the actions involve resistance, obstruction, or escape.

Practical Implications

• A person resisting arrest or attempting escape can face additional charges and penalties, making it clear that compliance with lawful procedures is non-negotiable.
• Law enforcement agencies are empowered to handle such situations knowing that the law provides for enhanced penalties.

Comparison to the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Section 262 corresponds to Section 224 of the IPC, retaining the core elements but revised under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita framework.