Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Section 260 – Intentional omission to apprehend on the part of public servant bound to apprehend person under sentence or lawfully committed

Whoever, being a public servant, legally bound as such public servant to apprehend or to keep in confinement any person under sentence of a Court for any offence or lawfully committed to custody, intentionally omits to apprehend such person, or intentionally suffers such person to escape or intentionally aids such person in escaping or attempting to escape from such confinement, shall be punished—

(a) with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, with or without fine, if the person in confinement, or who ought to have been apprehended, is under sentence of death;

(b) with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, with or without fine, if the person in confinement or who ought to have been apprehended, is subject, by a sentence of a Court, or by virtue of a commutation of such sentence, to imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years, or upwards;

(c) with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both, if the person in confinement or who ought to have been apprehended, is subject by a sentence of a Court to imprisonment for a term not extending to ten years or if the person was lawfully committed to custody.

Simplified Explanation

This section addresses the intentional failure of a public servant to apprehend or confine individuals who are under a court sentence or lawfully committed to custody. It outlines the responsibilities of public servants and the consequences of failing to fulfill them. Here’s the breakdown:

Key Components of Section 260

1. Subject of the Section:
   • A public servant who is legally obligated to:
     • Arrest a person under a court sentence or lawfully committed to custody.
     • Keep the individual in confinement.
2. Act or Omission Addressed:
   • Intentionally:
     • Failing to apprehend the person.
     • Allowing the person to escape.
     • Assisting the person in escaping or attempting to escape from custody or confinement.

Punishment Provisions

The severity of punishment depends on the nature of the offense or sentence of the escaped individual:

(a) If the escaped person is under a sentence of death:

• Punishment:
  • Imprisonment for life.
  • Imprisonment up to 14 years (of either rigorous or simple type).
  • Fine (optional, at the discretion of the court).
• Reason: This is the gravest category because allowing a person sentenced to death to escape compromises justice significantly.

(b) If the escaped person is sentenced to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 10 years or more:

• Punishment:
  • Imprisonment up to 7 years (rigorous or simple).
  • Fine (optional).
• Reason: Life imprisonment or long-term imprisonment signifies serious crimes, and the escape of such individuals has severe repercussions for public safety.

(c) If the escaped person is sentenced to imprisonment of less than 10 years or is lawfully committed to custody:

• Punishment:
  • Imprisonment up to 3 years (rigorous or simple).
  • Fine.
  • Both imprisonment and fine (if deemed appropriate).
• Reason: The offenses are relatively less serious, but neglect by public servants still undermines the law.

Intentionality

The section emphasizes the intentional nature of the omission or assistance. Accidental or unintentional failures may not fall under this section, as the intent to allow escape is a critical element for liability.

Purpose of the Section

1. Upholding Public Trust:
   • Public servants are entrusted with the responsibility of enforcing the law. Intentional failure undermines the justice system and public trust.
2. Ensuring Accountability:
   • The provision ensures that public servants face penalties for dereliction of duty.
3. Deterrence:
   • It acts as a deterrent against corrupt practices or negligence among officials.

Practical Implications

• A public servant who, for personal gain or due to negligence, aids a convict in escaping or avoids arresting them, faces severe consequences.
• This section applies to situations like:
  • A police officer deliberately letting a convict under a death sentence escape custody.
  • A jailer aiding a life-term prisoner in an escape attempt.
  • Any intentional lapse in duty leading to an escape.

Comparison to the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Section 260 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita closely corresponds to Section 221 of the IPC but is part of the reformed structure under the 2023 legislation. The essence remains the same, focusing on the accountability of public servants in custodial duties.