BNS Section 316 (IPC 406): criminal breach of trust

The number IPC 406 to 409 have now, how the punishment rises with who held the property, and what follows for arrest, bail and settlement.

Quick answer

Section 316 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita punishes criminal breach of trust and replaced sections 405 to 409 of the Indian Penal Code for offences committed on or after 1 July 2024. IPC 406 is now section 316(2): up to five years, or fine, or both. The punishment rises with who held the property — seven years for a carrier, warehouse-keeper, clerk or servant, and life or ten years for a public servant, banker, merchant or agent. Every sub-section is cognizable and non-bailable.

Punishes dishonestly misappropriating or misusing property that was entrusted to you — with heavier sub-sections for carriers, clerks and servants, public servants, bankers and agents.

Now
BNS 316 — Criminal breach of trust
Was
IPC 405 / 406 / 407 / 408 / 409
Punishment
316(2): up to 5 years or fine · 316(3), (4): up to 7 years and fine · 316(5): life or up to 10 years, and fine
Arrest without warrant
Cognizable
Bail
Non-bailable
Compounding
Depends on the sub-section — see below
Tried by
Magistrate of the first class

Read this first: Settlement does not follow severity: 316(3) can be compounded without the court’s permission, 316(2) and 316(4) only with it, and 316(5) not at all.

The number it had, and the number it has
Repealed — Indian Penal Code, 1860
IPC 405 / 406 / 407 / 408 / 409
Criminal breach of trust.
In force — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
BNS 316(1)
Criminal breach of trust.
MergedAlso marked changed

Several provisions of the Indian Penal Code were folded into one section of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, landing in its sub-sections. So the new number alone is not the answer — the sub-section is.

How this provision was renumbered
IPC 405becomes BNS 316(1)merged
IPC 406becomes BNS 316(2)merged
IPC 407becomes BNS 316(3)merged
IPC 408becomes BNS 316(4)merged
IPC 409becomes BNS 316(5)merged

Key takeaways

  • Section 316(1) defines criminal breach of trust; sub-sections (2) to (5) punish it according to the capacity in which the property was held.
  • IPC 406 became 316(2), 407 became 316(3), 408 became 316(4) and 409 became 316(5).
  • All four are cognizable and non-bailable, and all four are triable by a Magistrate of the first class (BNSS First Schedule).
  • Settlement depends on the sub-section: 316(3) without the court’s permission, 316(2) and 316(4) with it, and 316(5) not at all (BNSS s. 359).
  • An employer who deducts PF or ESI contributions and does not pay them in is deemed to have been entrusted with that money.

What BNS 316 actually requires

Every part below has to be present. This is not a list of factors to be weighed — if one element is missing, the offence is not made out at all, however bad the conduct looks.

  1. The accused was entrusted with property

    In any manner — or given dominion over it. An employer who deducts PF or ESI contributions is deemed entrusted with them (Explanations 1 and 2).

    and
  2. And dealt with it dishonestly

    Misappropriated it or converted it to their own use; or used or disposed of it in violation of a direction of law or of a legal contract about the trust; or wilfully let someone else do so.

    and
  3. With a dishonest intention

    Intending wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another (s. 2(7)). Departing from instructions in good faith is not enough, even if the owner loses (illustration (d)).

Read from section 316(1). The aggravated sub-sections add one more element each: the capacity — carrier, clerk, public servant, banker, agent — in which the property was entrusted.

Obtained by deception rather than entrusted? That is cheating, not breach of trust — the two are compared side by side on the BNS 318 page. The Act’s own example of the line with theft: goods left with a warehouse-keeper are not in the owner’s possession, so selling them is not theft, though it may be criminal breach of trust (s. 303, illustration (e)).

Is BNS 316 bailable, cognizable and compoundable?

Arrest, bail and the court come from the First Schedule to the BNSS; compounding comes from section 359. What follows from each label is given with it.

Classification of BNS 316, row by row
ProvisionArrestBailCompoundingTried by
316(2)CognizableNon-bailableWith the court’s permissionMagistrate of the first class
316(3)CognizableNon-bailableCompoundableMagistrate of the first class
316(4)CognizableNon-bailableWith the court’s permissionMagistrate of the first class
316(5)CognizableNon-bailableNot compoundableMagistrate of the first class

What these labels mean

  • Arrest
    Cognizable

    The police may register a case and begin investigating on their own, and may arrest without a warrant from a Magistrate. You do not need a court order to get an investigation started.

  • Bail
    Non-bailable

    Bail is discretionary, not unavailable. The court decides, weighing the offence, the evidence and the risk. The word describes who decides, not what they decide.

  • Compounding
    With the court’s permission

    May be compounded by the owner of the property in respect of which breach of trust has been committed, with the permission of the court. A compromise has the effect of an acquittal (s. 359(8)), and is not allowed where a previous conviction makes the accused liable to enhanced punishment (s. 359(7)).

  • Compounding
    Compoundable

    May be compounded by the owner of the property in respect of which the breach of trust has been committed. A compromise has the effect of an acquittal (s. 359(8)), and is not allowed where a previous conviction makes the accused liable to enhanced punishment (s. 359(7)).

  • Compounding
    Not compoundable

    The complainant cannot end the case by settling it. BNSS s. 359 lists every offence that may be compounded and this one is not on either list, so only the court can end the case.

  • Tried by
    Magistrate of the first class

    Tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class, whose sentencing power is capped, so the charge is expected to stay within that cap.

Read from the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (printed page 209), and section 359 for compounding.

Punishment for criminal breach of trust, by who held the property

The basic offence allows a fine alone. The three aggravated forms carry imprisonment and liability to fine, with no minimum term. Section 316(5) reaches imprisonment for life, yet the Schedule makes it triable by a Magistrate of the first class, whose sentencing power is three years (BNSS s. 23(2)). A Magistrate who thinks more is deserved sends the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who can pass up to seven (ss. 23(1), 364); the Court of Session and the High Court may also try any offence under the Sanhita (s. 21).

Who held the property decides the sub-section — and whether it can be settled
  1. BNS 316(2)was IPC 406

    Anyone entrusted with property, or with dominion over it

    Up to 5 years, or fine, or bothSettled only with the court’s permission
  2. BNS 316(3)was IPC 407

    A carrier, wharfinger or warehouse-keeper, entrusted in that capacity

    Up to 7 years, and fineOwner may settle, no permission needed
  3. BNS 316(4)was IPC 408

    A clerk or servant, or a person employed as one, entrusted in that capacity

    Up to 7 years, and fineSettled only with the court’s permission
  4. BNS 316(5)was IPC 409

    A public servant in that capacity, or a banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent in the way of business

    Imprisonment for life, or up to 10 years, and fineCannot be settled

Punishment from section 316 of the Sanhita; settlement from BNSS s. 359. The bar for 316(5) is drawn full width because imprisonment for life has no equivalent in years. All four rungs are cognizable, non-bailable and triable by a Magistrate of the first class.

Maximum imprisonment: criminal breach of trust and the offences next to it
  • BNS 316(5) — by a public servant, banker, merchant or agentthis pagelife, or up to 10 years
  • BNS 316(3) — by a carrier, wharfinger or warehouse-keeperthis pageup to 7 years and fine
  • BNS 316(4) — by a clerk or servantthis pageup to 7 years and fine
  • BNS 318(4) — cheating, property deliveredup to 7 years and fine
  • BNS 316(2) — criminal breach of trustthis pageup to 5 years, or fine
  • BNS 314 — dishonest misappropriation of property6 months to 2 years and fine

From the section text. A maximum is a ceiling, not what a court awards. The full-width bar is imprisonment for life.

What happens, and how long each part takes

  1. FIR registeredon the day, or after a 14-day enquiry for 316(2)

    Recorded and investigated without a Magistrate’s order (BNSS ss. 173, 175). For 316(2) the officer may first hold a preliminary enquiry, with a DSP’s permission (s. 173(3)).

  2. From here it is not yours to control

    Everything below happens on the investigating agency’s timetable and the court’s, not yours. You can follow it and you can be heard in it; you cannot set its pace.

    Arrest, or a notice to appearduring investigation

    316(2) to (4): arrest only on a recorded s. 35(1)(b) condition, otherwise a notice (s. 35(3)). 316(5): on credible information (s. 35(1)(c)).

  3. Charge-sheetwithin 60 days of custody, or 90 under 316(5)

    After that period an accused in custody is released on bail on furnishing it (s. 187(3)). The informant is told of progress within ninety days (s. 193(3)(ii)).

  4. Documents suppliedwithin 14 days of appearance

    Police report, FIR and statements to the accused, and to the victim if represented by an advocate (s. 230).

  5. Trial before a Magistrate of the first classno fixed period

    Where a heavier sentence is warranted the case goes to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (s. 364). An accused in custody throughout is bailed if trial is not over within sixty days of the first date for evidence, unless reasons are recorded (s. 480(6)).

The time limits are the BNSS’s own. No provision fixes how long the trial takes; the NCRB figures below show how many were still pending at the end of 2024.

What happened to cases like this — NCRB Crime in India 2024

Crime head: Criminal Breach of Trust (Section 316 BNS / Sections 406–409 IPC). NCRB reports by crime head rather than by section, so this is the closest head to the provision and not a count of cases under it.

Cases registered, 2024
21,251
  • Chargesheeting rate, 202473.5%

    Of the cases police finished investigating, the share that ended in a chargesheet rather than being closed.

  • Conviction rate, 202438.5%

    Of the trials that completed, the share that ended in conviction. Not the share of registered cases — most are still pending.

  • Trials still pending at the end of 202495.5%

    Of all cases before the courts that year, including those carried over from earlier years, the share not yet decided when the year closed.

NCRB, Crime in India 2024, Tables 17A.1 and 18A.1. NCRB defines this head as section 316 BNS / sections 406–409 IPC, so it covers every sub-section together. The 2024 volume counts IPC cases for January to June and BNS cases from 1 July in the same head. 2,684 convictions in 6,964 completed trials.

Is an employer who keeps PF or ESI deductions guilty of criminal breach of trust?

Section 316 answers this in its own text. An employer who deducts the employee’s contribution from wages for a Provident Fund or Family Pension Fund, or for the Employees’ State Insurance Fund, is deemed to have been entrusted with the amount deducted. If the employer then defaults in paying it in, in violation of the law governing the Fund, the employer is deemed to have used it dishonestly in violation of a direction of law (s. 316, Explanations 1 and 2).

Both parts of the offence — entrustment and dishonest use — are therefore supplied by the deeming words, once the deduction and the default are shown. Explanation 1 applies whether or not the establishment is exempted under section 17 of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

The two Explanations to section 316
Explanation 1Explanation 2
FundProvident Fund or Family Pension Fund established by any lawEmployees’ State Insurance Fund, administered by the ESI Corporation
Law it refers toEmployees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948
What the employer must have doneDeducted the employee’s contribution from wagesDeducted the employee’s contribution from wages
What is deemedEntrusted with the amount; dishonest use on defaultEntrusted with the amount; dishonest use on default

Summarised from the enacted text of section 316. The Explanations attach to the definition in 316(1); which punishing sub-section a prosecution invokes depends on the facts.

If your property was entrusted and misused: FIR, recovery and settlement

Criminal breach of trust is cognizable under every sub-section, so the police record the information and investigate without a Magistrate’s order, and you get a free copy (BNSS ss. 173(1), (2), 175(1)). For 316(2), punishable with up to five years, the officer may first hold a preliminary enquiry of up to fourteen days, with a Deputy Superintendent’s permission (s. 173(3)). If the station refuses to record it, write to the Superintendent of Police by post, and then to the Magistrate (s. 173(4)).

A court that convicts may order compensation for the loss from the fine, or a separate sum where there is no fine (s. 395(1)(b), (3)). Property produced in the case is listed, photographed and dealt with by the court (s. 497).

Only the owner of the property can settle. Under 316(3) no permission is needed; under 316(2) and 316(4) the court must permit it; 316(5) is in neither table of s. 359 and cannot be compounded (s. 359(9)).

If you have been accused of criminal breach of trust: arrest, bail and custody

An arrested person must be told the particulars of the offence, and their nominee informed (BNSS ss. 47(1), 48(1)). Under 316(2) to 316(4), punishable with up to seven years, arrest without a warrant needs a recorded condition under s. 35(1)(b); otherwise the police issue a notice to appear (s. 35(3)). Under 316(5), which carries life, credible information and reason to believe are enough (s. 35(1)(c)).

Every sub-section is non-bailable, so bail is the court’s decision (s. 480). Under 316(5) a Magistrate may not release a person where there are reasonable grounds to believe them guilty, save a child, a woman, or a sick or infirm person; a Court of Session or High Court is not so limited. Under 316(3) to (5) the Public Prosecutor must be heard first. Anticipatory bail is sought from the High Court or Court of Session (s. 482).

Custody before a charge-sheet is capped at sixty days under 316(2) to (4) and ninety days under 316(5) (s. 187(3)). Release after half the maximum under s. 479 does not apply to 316(5).

More questions about this page

What is IPC 406 in BNS?
Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code became section 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. It punishes criminal breach of trust with imprisonment of either description for up to five years, or with fine, or with both. It is cognizable and non-bailable, and triable by a Magistrate of the first class. Offences committed before 1 July 2024 are still charged under section 406.
Is BNS 316 bailable?
No. The First Schedule to the BNSS makes every punishing sub-section of 316 non-bailable, from 316(2) to 316(5). That means bail is for the court to decide rather than a right, not that it is unavailable. Bail becomes a right if no charge-sheet is filed within sixty days of custody, or ninety under 316(5), which carries imprisonment for life.
Can a criminal breach of trust case be settled by compromise?
It depends on the sub-section. Under section 359 of the BNSS the owner of the property may compound 316(3), breach of trust by a carrier or warehouse-keeper, without the court’s permission, and 316(2) and 316(4) only with it. Section 316(5), by a public servant, banker, merchant or agent, is not in either table and cannot be compounded.
What is the punishment under BNS 316(5)?
Section 316(5) applies where property is entrusted to a person in their capacity as a public servant, or in the way of their business as a banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent. The punishment is imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for up to ten years, and liability to fine. It was section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.
Is not returning money or goods always criminal breach of trust?
No. The property must have been entrusted, and it must have been misappropriated, converted or used dishonestly. Illustration (d) to section 316 says an agent who departs from instructions in good faith, believing it better for the owner, commits no criminal breach of trust even if the owner loses money; the owner’s remedy is a civil action. Property obtained by deception is cheating instead.
What is the difference between IPC 406 and IPC 409?
Both are now parts of section 316 of the Sanhita. IPC 406 is 316(2), the general offence: up to five years, or fine, or both, compoundable with the court’s permission. IPC 409 is 316(5), where the person entrusted is a public servant, banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent: life or up to ten years, and not compoundable. Both are cognizable and non-bailable.

Official sources checked

The statutes, rules and regulator pages the statements on this page were checked against.

What to do next

A criminal matter is not something to work out from a page, and this one does not pretend otherwise. Whether you are complaining or answering a charge, the next step is a lawyer.

If you cannot pay for one, you do not have to

Free legal services are a legal entitlement, not charity. Under section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 they are available to anyone in custody, every woman and every child, members of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, persons with disabilities, victims of trafficking or of a disaster or caste atrocity, industrial workers, and anyone whose income is below the limit their State sets — provided the legal services authority is satisfied there is a case to bring or defend (section 13).

Not legal advice. This page explains what a provision says and how the procedure around it works, checked against the Act as in force on the date shown. It is not advice about a charge, a complaint or an arrest, and it cannot be: whether a provision fits a set of facts is the question a court decides, and the facts a page cannot see are usually the ones that matter. If you are facing a criminal matter, or deciding whether to start one, speak to an advocate.

No legal reviewer, deliberately. GetNyay is not a law firm and does not practise law. Nothing on this page is legal advice or a substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts. Our tax and consumer pages carry a Chartered Accountant’s review credit; that credential does not extend to criminal law, so these pages carry none. We would rather show you the sources than a review that has not happened — every section number and classification here is cited to the Act or the Schedule it came from, with the date checked.

Last reviewed September 2026.

Ask GetNyay AI