IPC 511 vs BNS 62: Attempt to Commit Offences Explained (2026)

In India, Section 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) replaced Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) on 1 July 2024. The general rule for punishing attempts is unchanged: up to one-half of the longest term, or of imprisonment for life, provided for the offence, or the fine provided for it, or both. Only "Code" becomes "Sanhita", and the section moves to Chapter IV.

At a glance

IPC	BNS	What it covers	Punishment (BNS text)	Classification (BNSS First Schedule)	Change
511	62	Attempt to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, where no express provision punishes the attempt	Imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, up to one-half of imprisonment for life or one-half of the longest term provided, or such fine as is provided for the offence, or both	Cognizable or non-cognizable, and bailable or non-bailable, according as the offence attempted is; triable by the court by which the offence attempted is triable	Minor edit

The CrPC First Schedule classified Section 511 IPC the same way ("According as the offence is cognizable or non-cognizable"; "According as the offence attempted by the offender is bailable or not"; "The court by which the offence attempted is triable").

What changed

Minor edit — "this Code" becomes "this Sanhita": in "an offence punishable by this Code" and "where no express provision is made by this Code". Every other word of the operative text is the same, including "or to cause such an offence to be committed" and "does any act towards the commission of the offence".
Identical — punishment: "imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence, or with such fine as is provided for the offence, or with both". In the IPC these words were substituted by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1955 (Act 26 of 1955) with effect from 1 January 1956, together with "imprisonment for life" for "transportation for life"; the BNS enacts the substituted text directly.
Identical — Illustrations (a) and (b): the empty jewel box and the empty pocket.
Modified — placement: Section 511 was the last section of the IPC, alone in Chapter XXIII ("Of Attempts to Commit Offences"). Section 62 sits under the sub-heading "Of attempt" in BNS Chapter IV, "Of Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy and Attempt", immediately after criminal conspiracy (Section 61).
Minor edit — fractions rule: Section 57 IPC reckoned imprisonment for life as equivalent to imprisonment for twenty years "in calculating fractions of terms of punishment". Section 6 BNS says the same and adds "unless otherwise provided".
Minor edit — classification and compounding: the BNSS First Schedule row for Section 62 follows the CrPC First Schedule row for Section 511 in substance, with drafting changes ("bailable or not" becomes "bailable or non-bailable"). Section 359(3) BNSS repeats Section 320(3) CrPC, with the cross-references to Sections 34 and 149 IPC replaced by Section 3(5) and Section 190 BNS.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 511 IPC (repealed from 1 July 2024):

Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by this Code with [imprisonment for life] or imprisonment, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such attempt, be punished …

Extract, Section 62 BNS:

Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by this Sanhita with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this Sanhita for the punishment of such attempt, be punished with imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence, or with such fine as is provided for the offence, or with both.

How it works — the ingredients

Section 62 BNS has four elements.

An offence punishable by the Sanhita with imprisonment for life or imprisonment. Section 2(24) BNS defines "offence", except in listed chapters and sections, as "a thing made punishable by this Sanhita". On a reading of the text, Section 62 does not reach an offence punishable only with fine, and it does not reach offences created by other Acts; attempts under a special law depend on that law's own wording.
An attempt to commit it, or to cause it to be committed. The words "or to cause such an offence to be committed" extend the section to a person who attempts to have the offence carried out by someone else.
An act towards its commission, done in the attempt. Intention alone is not enough, and nor is preparation. Illustration (a) — A breaks open a box to steal jewels and finds it empty — and Illustration (b) — A thrusts his hand into Z's empty pocket — show that the attempt is complete even though the offence was impossible on the facts.
No express provision for the attempt. Where the BNS itself punishes the attempt, that provision applies instead. Examples: Section 109 (attempt to murder), Section 110 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), Section 226 (attempt to commit suicide to compel or restrain the exercise of lawful power) and Section 309(5) (attempt to commit robbery, rigorous imprisonment up to seven years and fine).

Preparation and attempt — the statute's own examples. Illustrations (c) and (d) to Section 109 BNS draw the line for attempt to murder: A, intending to murder Z, "buys a gun and loads it" — "A has not yet committed the offence"; A fires the gun at Z — he has. A mixes poison into food "which remains in A's keeping" — not yet the offence; A places the food on Z's table — he has.

Calculating the ceiling. The maximum is one-half of the longest term provided for the offence attempted. Section 318(4) BNS (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) provides up to seven years and fine, so an attempt punishable under Section 62 carries up to three and a half years, or the fine provided, or both. For an offence punishable with imprisonment for life, Section 6 BNS reckons life as twenty years for calculating fractions, "unless otherwise provided", so the ceiling is ten years on a reading of Sections 6 and 62 together. On a reading of the text, Section 62 sets only a maximum ("may extend to") and does not carry over a minimum sentence prescribed for the full offence.

What this means in practice

For the investigating officer and prosecutor

Charge the attempt with the offence attempted: for example, Section 62 read with Section 318(4) BNS. Whether an FIR can be registered, whether bail is a right and which court tries the case all follow the offence attempted (BNSS First Schedule, row 62).
Check first whether the BNS has an express attempt provision for that offence (Sections 109, 110, 226, 309(5) and others). If it has, Section 62 does not apply.
The evidence must show an act beyond preparation. Record the step that moved the accused from arranging the means to beginning the offence — in Abhayanand Mishra, the despatch of the application.

For the accused and defence advocate

The core defence question is whether the acts proved went beyond preparation. Aman Kumar shows the Supreme Court substituting a lesser offence where the material did not prove an attempt.
Section 62 sets only a maximum; the court may impose fine alone ("or with such fine as is provided for the offence").
Compounding follows the full offence. Under Section 359(3) BNSS, if the offence is compoundable, an attempt to commit it "(when such attempt is itself an offence)" may be compounded in like manner.

For the victim or complainant

An offence that failed is still an offence. Illustrations (a) and (b) to Section 62 show that the attempt is complete even where the thing intended could not be achieved on the facts.

Judgments that still matter

Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar, [1962] 2 S.C.R. 241 — 24 April 1961. K. Subba Rao and Raghubar Dayal JJ. (judgment by Raghubar Dayal J.) upheld a conviction under Section 420 read with Section 511 IPC of a man who applied to Patna University to sit the M.A. examination on false representations, inducing it to issue an admission card that would have been delivered to him had the fraud not been detected. Rejecting the argument that he had not gone beyond preparation, the Court summarised the construction of Section 511: a person attempts an offence when he intends to commit it and, "having made preparations and with the intention to commit the offence, does an act towards its commission; such an act need not be the penultimate act". On the facts, preparation was complete when he prepared the application, and "The moment he despatched it, he entered the realm of attempting to commit the offence of 'cheating'." The appeal was dismissed. The report does not show paragraph numbers. The operative words construed are repeated in Section 62 BNS.

State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yakub s/o Abdul Hamid & Ors., [1980] 2 S.C.R. 1158 (1980 INSC 40) — 4 March 1980. R.S. Sarkaria and O. Chinnappa Reddy JJ. allowed the State's appeal against the Bombay High Court's judgment upholding the acquittal, set aside the acquittal and convicted the respondents under Section 135(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, for attempting to export silver ingots unloaded at night near a creek from which the sound of a sea-craft engine was heard. The offence was under those Acts, not Section 511, but Sarkaria J., in the lead judgment, adopted Abhayanand Mishra, stating: "Attempt begins where preparation ends." In a concurring opinion, Chinnappa Reddy J. noted that, apart from specific attempt offences such as Sections 307 and 308, attempts under the Penal Code are generally dealt with under Section 511, and stated that an attempt needs an intention to commit a particular offence, an act done towards its commission, and that the act be "proximate" to the intended result, the measure of proximity being "in relation to intention". The report does not show paragraph numbers.

Aman Kumar and Anr. v. State of Haryana, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 237 (2004 INSC 93) — 10 February 2004. Doraiswamy Raju and Arijit Pasayat JJ. (judgment by Pasayat J.) set aside the appellants' conviction under Section 376(2)(g) IPC. The Court described Section 511 as "a general provision dealing with attempts to commit offences not made punishable by other specific sections", and held that on the evidence the offence could not be said to be an attempt to commit rape under Section 376 read with Section 511, because there was no material that the accused were determined to have intercourse in all events. It convicted them instead under Section 354 read with Section 34 IPC and imposed two years' custody each and a fine of Rs.500 each. The report does not show paragraph numbers. Section 354 IPC is now Section 74 BNS.

Using older case law under Section 62. The operative words of Section 62 repeat Section 511 IPC, so, on a reading of the text, judgments construing "attempts" and "does any act towards the commission of the offence" remain relevant to Section 62.

Which law applies to your case

Section 358(2) BNS provides that the repeal of the IPC does not affect any penalty or punishment incurred under it, and that proceedings may be instituted, continued or enforced "as if that Code had not been repealed"; on a reading of that provision, an attempt made before 1 July 2024 is charged under Section 511 IPC with the offence attempted. The punishment formula is the same, but the ceiling depends on the offence attempted, and Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars a penalty greater than the law in force at the time; on a reading of that Article, any higher maximum for the full offence under the BNS cannot be used to calculate the ceiling for earlier conduct. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNS equivalent of Section 511 IPC? Section 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 511 IPC with effect from 1 July 2024. It carries the same heading, the same punishment and the same two Illustrations; the only textual change is that 'this Code' becomes 'this Sanhita'. It now sits in Chapter IV of the BNS, Of Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy and Attempt.

What is the punishment for an attempt under Section 62 BNS? Section 62 BNS provides imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term up to one-half of imprisonment for life or one-half of the longest term provided for that offence, or the fine provided for the offence, or both. Section 6 BNS reckons imprisonment for life as twenty years when calculating fractions, unless otherwise provided, so the ceiling for attempting a life-imprisonment offence is ten years on a reading of the two sections.

When does Section 62 BNS not apply to an attempt? Section 62 applies only where no express provision is made by the BNS for punishing the attempt. Attempts that have their own sections, such as attempt to murder (Section 109), attempt to commit culpable homicide (Section 110) and attempt to commit robbery (Section 309(5)), are punished under those sections. Section 62 also covers only offences punishable by the Sanhita with imprisonment for life or imprisonment.

What is the difference between preparation and attempt? Preparation is not punishable under Section 62 BNS; the section needs an attempt and an act done towards the commission of the offence. In Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar, [1962] 2 S.C.R. 241, the Supreme Court held that the act need not be the penultimate act but must be an act during the course of committing the offence. Illustrations (c) and (d) to Section 109 BNS show the line for attempt to murder: buying and loading a gun, or mixing poison into food, is not yet the offence.

Is an attempt a bailable offence under the BNSS? It depends on the offence attempted. The First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 classifies an offence under Section 62 BNS as cognizable or non-cognizable, and bailable or non-bailable, according to the offence attempted, and triable by the court that tries that offence. The CrPC First Schedule treated Section 511 IPC the same way.

Can an attempt to commit an offence be compounded? Yes, if the full offence is compoundable. Section 359(3) BNSS provides that when an offence is compoundable, an attempt to commit it (when such attempt is itself an offence) may be compounded in like manner. Section 320(3) CrPC was to the same effect.

Which law applies to an attempt made before 1 July 2024? Section 358(2) BNS saves any penalty or punishment incurred under the IPC and lets proceedings continue as if the IPC had not been repealed, so on a reading of that provision an attempt made before 1 July 2024 is charged under Section 511 IPC read with the offence attempted. Because the punishment formula in Section 62 is the same, the change of section number does not by itself change the sentence range.

Sources

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 2(24), 6, 61-62, 109, 110, 226, 309(5), 318(4) and 358.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (India Code text): Sections 57 and 511 with footnotes.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Section 359(3) and the First Schedule entry for Section 62 BNS.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 320(3) and the First Schedule entry for Section 511 IPC.
Constitution of India: Article 20(1).
Judgments read in full text: Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar (1962_2_241_253_EN.md); State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yakub (1980_2_1158_1171_EN.md); Aman Kumar v. State of Haryana (2004_2_237_248_EN.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.

Section 511 IPC vs Section 62 BNS — Attempt to Commit Offences