Sections 499 to 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which defined defamation, prescribed its punishment, and penalised the printing and sale of defamatory matter, have been replaced by Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, effective 1 July 2024. The BNS consolidates all four IPC defamation provisions into a single section with graded sub-sections, retains the detailed definition with its four explanations and ten exceptions, and introduces community service as an alternative punishment for simple defamation.
What changed
| Old law | New law | |
|---|---|---|
| Act | Indian Penal Code, 1860 | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 |
| Section | 499 (definition), 500 (punishment), 501 (printing), 502 (sale) | 356 (consolidated — definition, punishment, printing, sale) |
| Title | Defamation — four separate provisions | Defamation — unified provision |
| Change type | Modified — consolidated, community service added for simple defamation |
Full statutory text
Section 499 IPC — Defamation definition (repealed w.e.f. 1 July 2024)
Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.
[Followed by four Explanations and ten Exceptions]
Section 500 IPC — Punishment (repealed w.e.f. 1 July 2024)
Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 356 BNS — Defamation
(1) Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs, or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.
[Retains four Explanations and ten Exceptions identical to IPC Section 499]
(2) Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both, or with community service. [Corresponds to Section 500 IPC — community service added]
(3) Whoever prints or engraves any matter knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. [Corresponds to Section 501 IPC]
(4) Whoever sells or offers for sale any printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter, knowing that it contains such matter, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. [Corresponds to Section 502 IPC]
Text in bold represents provisions that are new compared to the IPC.
Key differences
Community service for simple defamation: BNS Section 356(2) adds community service as a fourth sentencing option for simple defamation, alongside imprisonment, fine, or both. This is a significant new alternative that gives courts flexibility in sentencing, particularly for minor or first-time defamation offences.
Consolidation of four sections into one: IPC Sections 499-502 are merged into BNS Section 356 with four sub-sections — definition (sub-section 1), punishment (sub-section 2), printing (sub-section 3), and sale (sub-section 4).
No community service for printing and sale: Notably, the community service option is available only for simple defamation under sub-section (2). Printing or engraving defamatory matter (sub-section 3) and selling defamatory publications (sub-section 4) do not include community service as a sentencing option — only imprisonment and fine.
Definition and exceptions unchanged: The detailed definition of defamation, its four explanations (covering imputations to the deceased, companies, conduct of public servants, and published reports of court proceedings), and all ten exceptions (truth for public good, public conduct of public servants, court proceedings, merits of public performance, censure by authority, literary criticism, among others) are retained without modification.
Criminal defamation retained: Despite extensive debate about decriminalising defamation and treating it purely as a civil wrong, the BNS retains criminal defamation. The constitutional validity of criminal defamation, upheld in Subramanian Swamy (2016), extends to Section 356 BNS.
What this means for practitioners
For drafting and citations: All defamation complaints for offences committed on or after 1 July 2024 must cite BNS Section 356. The specific sub-section should be cited: 356(2) for spoken or written defamation, 356(3) for printing defamatory matter, and 356(4) for selling defamatory publications.
For pending cases: Offences committed before 1 July 2024 continue under IPC Sections 499-502. The community service option under BNS Section 356(2), being a more favourable provision, may arguably be available to accused persons in pending cases under the principle that a beneficial penal provision applies retroactively. However, this remains untested.
For sentencing submissions: Defence counsel should actively advocate for community service under Section 356(2) BNS as an alternative to imprisonment, particularly in cases involving minor defamation, first-time offenders, or disputes arising from personal or political disagreements. Prosecution should note that this option is not available for sub-sections (3) and (4).
For media practitioners: The consolidation does not change the substantive law for media-related defamation. The ten exceptions, particularly Exception 1 (truth for public good) and Exception 9 (good faith imputation for protection of interests), continue to provide defences for responsible journalism. Practitioners should note that the community service option applies only to the underlying defamation, not to the printing or sale of defamatory material.
Does old case law still apply?
The extensive jurisprudence on defamation under IPC Sections 499-502 remains fully applicable to BNS Section 356, as the definition, exceptions, and explanations are retained without modification.
Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 221 — A five-judge Constitution Bench upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation under IPC Sections 499-500, holding that the right to reputation is a fundamental right under Article 21 and that reasonable restrictions on free speech under Article 19(2) include defamation. This validation extends to BNS Section 356.
R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994) 6 SCC 632 — The Court held that the right to privacy and the right of the press to publish are not absolute and must be balanced. The Court established that public officials have a diminished right to privacy regarding their official conduct but retain full protection for private matters. These principles continue to govern defamation claims under BNS Section 356.
Judicial interpretation under BNS 356 (post-July 2024)
Online News Portal v. Complainant (C. 3204/2025, 7 May 2025)
Court: Delhi High Court | Result: Petitions dismissed — BNSS Section 223 notice requirement does not apply to pre-BNS defamation complaints
The Delhi High Court addressed a significant transitional issue in a criminal defamation case. An online news portal and its journalist challenged a summoning order, arguing that BNSS Section 223 — which requires notice to the accused before issuance of summons — should have been applied. The complaint was originally filed in 2016 under IPC Section 499/500, had undergone procedural setbacks, and was remanded by the Supreme Court in 2024 for reconsideration. The Court held that proceedings initiated under the CrPC continue under the CrPC as mandated by BNSS Section 531(2)(a), and the new BNSS procedural safeguards (including the Section 223 notice requirement) do not apply to pre-existing complaints. This decision clarifies the transitional regime for pending defamation cases.
Veritect reference: DLHC010276592025_1_2025-05-07
Emerging patterns
Based on available post-July 2024 orders, the initial judicial approach suggests:
- Transitional provisions strictly applied: The Delhi HC's application of BNSS Section 531(2)(a) to exclude new procedural safeguards from pre-existing cases establishes that pending defamation complaints will continue under the old CrPC framework, even where significant procedural events (like remand) occur after 1 July 2024.
- Community service option untested: No case has yet applied the community service sentencing alternative under BNS Section 356(2). The first such sentence will establish important parameters for what constitutes "community service" in the defamation context and how it is supervised.
- Constitutional validity of criminal defamation remains settled: The five-judge bench decision in Subramanian Swamy (2016) continues to foreclose challenges to the constitutionality of criminal defamation under BNS Section 356, with no indication of reconsideration.
Frequently asked questions
What is the BNS equivalent of Section 500 IPC? Section 356(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is the direct equivalent of Section 500 IPC. The maximum punishment of two years simple imprisonment and fine remains unchanged. Community service has been added as an additional sentencing option.
Is criminal defamation still an offence under BNS? Yes. Despite calls for decriminalisation, the BNS retains criminal defamation under Section 356. The constitutional validity of criminal defamation, upheld by the Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016), applies to the new provision.
What is the community service option for defamation? Under BNS Section 356(2), courts can now impose community service as an alternative to imprisonment or fine for simple defamation. This option is not available for offences under sub-sections (3) and (4) — printing or selling defamatory matter.
Are the ten exceptions to defamation still available under BNS? Yes. All ten exceptions from IPC Section 499 — including truth published for public good, fair comment on public conduct, fair reporting of court proceedings, and good faith censure — are retained without modification in BNS Section 356(1).