Section 138

This definition traces back to the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 362), carried forward into the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Colonial-era lawmakers wanted a broad term to cover situations where a person is moved from one place to another against their will or through trickery, regardless of their age or consent status. Unlike kidnapping, abduction doesn't depend on the victim being a minor or being taken from lawful guardianship — it focuses purely on the method (force or deceit) used to make someone move. On its own, abduction is not a punishable crime; it becomes punishable only when read with other sections that attach specific bad intentions (such as abduction for murder, ransom, forced marriage, or slavery).

Courts have long treated this as a foundational definition clause, not a standalone offence. Judicial interpretation under the equivalent IPC provision clarified that abduction is a continuing act — it persists as long as the person is kept away by force or deceit, unlike kidnapping, which is usually treated as a one-time act completed at the moment of taking. Courts have also held that 'deceitful means' can include false promises or misrepresentations that lure a person away, and that consent obtained through deception does not count as free, voluntary consent.

• Myth: Abduction under this section is automatically a punishable crime.
  Fact: This section only defines the term 'abduction.' It becomes a punishable offence only when read together with other sections that specify a harmful purpose (like abduction to murder or to compel marriage).
• Myth: Abduction only applies to minors, like kidnapping.
  Fact: Unlike kidnapping, abduction applies to a person of any age — the focus is on whether force or deceit was used to make them go from a place, not on their age or guardianship status.