IPC 506 in the new BNS 2023

If you have been named in an FIR or notice under this section, the section number alone does not decide the outcome — the facts, the evidence and the procedure do. Many cases turn on procedural lapses, bail strategy and the exact ingredients of the offence.

Criminal intimidation is one of the most commonly added sections in Indian FIRs, and it rarely appears alone — it is usually charged alongside hurt, trespass or a property offence arising from the same quarrel. Under the BNS the definition sits at Section 351(1), the ordinary punishment at 351(2), and the aggravated form at 351(3).

What the section requires

For the offence to be made out, these ingredients have to be established:

• the accused threatened another person with injury to their person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of someone in whom that person is interested
• the threat was made with intent to cause alarm, or to cause the person to do something they were not legally bound to do, or to omit something they were legally entitled to do
• for the aggravated form, the threat was to cause death or grievous hurt, to destroy property by fire, to commit an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment or seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman

What changed from the IPC

The offence is carried over without substantive change; what altered is the numbering and the arrangement. IPC 503 defined criminal intimidation and IPC 506 supplied the punishment in two parts. The BNS consolidates both into a single Section 351, with the definition in sub-section (1), the ordinary offence in sub-section (2) punishable with up to two years, and the aggravated offence in sub-section (3) punishable with up to seven years. Anonymous criminal intimidation, formerly IPC 507, now sits at Section 351(4) and adds up to two years to the punishment for the underlying threat.

How this section is distinguished from related offences

The line between criminal intimidation and mere abuse is the one that decides most of these cases. Insulting language intended to provoke a breach of the peace is a different and lesser offence, now BNS 352, and abusive words alone do not become intimidation simply because they were frightening. What the section requires is a threat of injury coupled with the intention to cause alarm or to compel or prevent an act. Extortion, now BNS 308, goes a step further: there the threat is used to dishonestly induce the delivery of property, which criminal intimidation does not require. Assault, now BNS 131, requires a gesture or preparation causing apprehension of imminent criminal force, which is narrower than a threat of future injury.

How the case proceeds

Which sub-section is invoked changes almost everything about the case. The ordinary offence under 351(2) is punishable with up to two years and is tried by a magistrate; the aggravated offence under 351(3) carries up to seven years, which places it in a different bracket for the purposes of arrest, bail and the seriousness with which it is treated. Because the aggravated form turns on the content of the threat, the precise words alleged in the FIR carry unusual weight, and disputes about what was actually said are the core of most contested cases.

Evidence that usually decides these cases

Because the offence usually consists of spoken words, the case turns on how reliably those words were captured. Messages, emails and voice notes are the strongest material because they fix the content and the time. Where the threat was oral, independent witnesses matter more than related ones, and the promptness of the complaint is heavily scrutinised: a threat reported the same day reads very differently from one first alleged weeks later, in a complaint filed after the relationship between the parties deteriorated. Where the aggravated sub-section is invoked, courts look closely at whether the words alleged actually amount to a threat to cause death or grievous hurt, rather than accepting the characterisation in the FIR.

How courts approach sentencing

The ordinary offence under BNS 351(2) carries up to two years, or a fine, or both. The aggravated offence under 351(3) carries up to seven years, or a fine, or both. Anonymous intimidation under 351(4) adds up to two years to whatever the underlying threat attracts. In practice, where this section is one of several arising from a single incident, the sentence on it is rarely the operative part of the outcome.

Defences that commonly apply

The most common and most effective answer is that the words, taken as they were actually spoken, do not amount to a threat of injury at all, or that they were uttered in the heat of a quarrel without the intention to cause alarm — intention being an ingredient the prosecution must establish, not one presumed from the fact that the complainant says they were frightened. Where the aggravated sub-section is charged, arguing that the threat does not reach the level of death or grievous hurt can move the case into the lesser bracket. Delay in complaining, and the existence of a prior dispute between the parties, are routinely relied on to suggest the allegation was added to strengthen an unrelated complaint.

How a case under this section typically progresses

The offence is almost always investigated as part of a larger FIR, so its timeline follows the principal offence rather than running separately. Where the ordinary sub-section alone is involved, the matter proceeds before a magistrate and is comparatively short. Where the aggravated sub-section is invoked, the case is treated more seriously from the outset, which affects bail and the pace at which it moves. Disputes about which sub-section applies are frequently argued at the stage of framing charges, and a successful argument there can substantially change the shape of the case.

Documents worth gathering early

Preserve the message, email or voice note containing the threat in its original form on the original device, because forwarded screenshots are routinely challenged and are far weaker. Note the date, time and place of the incident and the names and contact details of anyone present who is not related to either side. Where there is a prior dispute between the parties — a property disagreement, a business falling-out, a matrimonial matter — keep the papers from it, because the context in which the alleged threat was made is usually central to both sides. If the incident occurred in a place covered by CCTV, request the footage in writing immediately, as it is commonly overwritten within days.

Note on bail and cognizability. Whether an offence is cognizable, and whether it is bailable, is set by the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, not by the BNS section itself. Because that classification decides whether police can arrest without a warrant and how bail is approached, check it for your specific section with an advocate rather than relying on a general summary.

If you have been named under this section

Since this section is usually one of several in a single FIR arising from a quarrel, it is a mistake to respond to it in isolation. Establish which sub-section has been invoked, because the answer determines whether the matter is a magistrate-level case or something considerably more serious. Where the allegation rests on words spoken during an argument, any recording, message or independent witness that captures what was actually said is the material that matters, and it is exactly the material that disappears quickest.

Common misunderstandings

"Any abusive language is criminal intimidation."
It is not. Abuse intended to provoke a breach of the peace is a separate and lesser offence under BNS 352. Intimidation requires a threat of injury made with intent to cause alarm or to compel or prevent an act.

"A threat has to be carried out to be an offence."
No. The offence is complete when the threat is made with the required intention. Whether the threatened injury ever occurred is irrelevant to the section, though it may support a separate charge.

"IPC 506 was deleted."
It was renumbered. The definition is at BNS 351(1), the ordinary punishment at 351(2) and the aggravated punishment at 351(3).

"A threat sent anonymously cannot be prosecuted."
Anonymous criminal intimidation is dealt with specifically at BNS 351(4), which adds up to two years to the punishment for the threat itself.

Related BNS sections

• BNS 351 — Criminal intimidation
• BNS 352 — Intentional insult to provoke breach of peace (IPC 504)
• BNS 308 — Extortion (IPC 384)
• BNS 131 — Assault or criminal force (IPC 352)

Which code applies to your case

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 replaced the Indian Penal Code 1860 with effect from 1 July 2024, and the change is not retrospective. The date the offence is alleged to have been committed decides which code governs it. An offence alleged to have occurred on or after 1 July 2024 proceeds under the BNS. An offence alleged to have occurred before that date continues to be investigated, tried, appealed and punished under the IPC, even where the FIR was registered later. Cases from the transition period frequently cite both numbering systems, which is why the old section number remains worth knowing.

Named under this section? Ask the free AI Advocate →

General information for understanding the IPC→BNS change, not legal advice. The BNS restructured many offences — confirm the exact section, sub-section and punishment with a licensed advocate.