Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Section 62
Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment
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. Illustrations.
(a) A makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking open a box, and finds after so opening the box, that there is no jewel in it. He has done an act towards the commission of theft, and therefore is guilty under this section.
(b) A makes an attempt to pick the pocket of Z by thrusting his hand into Z’s pocket. A fails in the attempt in consequence of Z’s having nothing in his pocket. A is guilty under this section.
Why this exists
Criminal law has long recognized that a person who takes real steps toward committing a crime is dangerous and blameworthy even if the crime fails for reasons beyond their control — like an empty box or an empty pocket. This provision, carried forward from Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, exists as a general 'catch-all' for attempts to commit any offence with a jail term where no separate, specific attempt-punishment provision already exists in the Sanhita. It ensures failed or interrupted crimes don't escape punishment entirely, while typically imposing a lighter penalty than for the completed offence.
How courts read it
Under the identical Section 511 of the erstwhile IPC, courts developed the principle that an 'attempt' begins once a person moves beyond mere preparation and does an act directly linked to committing the offence. Courts have held that failure of the attempt due to circumstances outside the accused's control (like finding no valuables) does not excuse guilt, as illustrated by the classic empty-box and empty-pocket examples reproduced in this section. Judicial decisions have consistently distinguished 'preparation' (not punishable) from 'attempt' (punishable), often using tests like the 'proximity rule' — how close the act was to actually completing the crime.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: If the crime doesn't succeed or nothing is actually stolen/harmed, there's no punishment.
Fact: The law specifically punishes the attempt itself, as shown by the empty-box and empty-pocket examples — failure due to unlucky circumstances doesn't excuse the attempt. - Myth: Merely thinking about or planning a crime is enough to be guilty under this section.
Fact: The law requires an actual act done toward committing the offence, not just intention or preparation — courts distinguish mere preparation from a punishable attempt. - Myth: The punishment for attempt is the same as for the completed crime.
Fact: The punishment is capped at half the maximum jail term (or half of life imprisonment) prescribed for the completed offence, unless another law specifically provides a different punishment for that attempt.