Whoever, being a public servant legally bound as such public servant to apprehend, or to keep in confinement, any person in any case not provided for in section 259, section 260 or section 261, or in any other law for the time being in force, omits to apprehend that person or suffers him to escape from confinement, shall be punished—
(a) if he does so intentionally, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both; and
(b) if he does so negligently, with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Simplified Explanation
Section 264 deals with the omission or negligence by a public servant who is legally bound to apprehend or keep a person in confinement, where the scenario is not already covered by Sections 259, 260, or 261 (or any other existing laws). This section extends accountability to public servants in cases that are not specifically addressed elsewhere in the legislation.
Key Components of Section 264
- Who is Covered?
- Public servants who are legally obligated to:
- Apprehend or detain a person for any offense or judicial reason.
- Keep a person in confinement when legally required to do so.
- Public servants who are legally obligated to:
- Scope of the Section:
- This provision applies in cases that do not fall under Section 259, Section 260, or Section 261, or under any other relevant law.
- Section 259 deals with cases where a public servant intentionally omits to apprehend or suffers an escape under specific conditions.
- Section 260 covers intentional omissions or negligent failures regarding persons sentenced by a court.
- Section 261 addresses negligent omissions or failures by public servants to apprehend or detain.
- This provision applies in cases that do not fall under Section 259, Section 260, or Section 261, or under any other relevant law.
- Actions Addressed:
- Omission to apprehend: Failure to arrest a person or take them into custody when required.
- Sufferance of escape: Allowing a person, who is supposed to be detained, to escape from confinement or custody.
Punishment
The punishment is dependent on whether the public servant’s failure was intentional or negligent:
(a) Intentional Failure
- Punishment:
- Imprisonment (either rigorous or simple) for a term up to 3 years.
- Fine (optional).
- Both imprisonment and fine.
(b) Negligent Failure
- Punishment:
- Simple imprisonment for up to 2 years.
- Fine (optional).
- Both imprisonment and fine.
Purpose of the Section
- Accountability for Public Servants:
- The section ensures that public servants are held accountable for lapses that do not fall under other specific provisions. Even in these cases, neglecting to perform duties related to apprehending or detaining individuals must have consequences.
- Ensuring Proper Law Enforcement:
- It is a safeguard to ensure that public servants act diligently in their duties to uphold the law and ensure persons are not unlawfully freed or left unapprehended.
- Preventing Negligence:
- The distinction between intentional and negligent omissions in this section ensures that even accidental or careless neglect is penalized, albeit with a lesser punishment than intentional failures.
Examples of Applicability
- Intentional Omission:
- A police officer deliberately ignores a court order to arrest an individual involved in a lesser offense, knowing the individual is at a known location.
- A jailor intentionally fails to stop a prisoner from escaping, despite being assigned to monitor that prisoner.
- Negligent Omission:
- A public servant neglects their duty by leaving a gate unsecured or fails to supervise a detained individual properly, leading to an escape.
Comparison to the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Section 264 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is similar in principle to Section 221 of the IPC, which deals with neglect or failure to apprehend a person or sufferance of escape, but it is restructured and extended under the 2023 reform to handle cases that don’t fall under more specific provisions.
