This section applies to any public servant who lets any regular criminal escape.

It specifically covers only 'State prisoners' and 'prisoners of war', not ordinary criminal suspects or convicts, who are covered by other IPC sections.

A guard can be punished even if the escape was accidental or due to carelessness.

The section requires that the public servant 'voluntarily' allowed the escape, meaning intentional or deliberate facilitation, not mere negligence.

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 128

repealed

Public servant voluntarily allowing prisoner of state or war to escape

Whoever, being a public servant and having the custody of any State prisoner or prisoner of war, voluntarily allows such prisoner to escape from any place in which such prisoner is confined, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.§

Why this exists

Colonial-era India needed strict rules to keep state prisoners (people held for political or security reasons) and prisoners of war securely confined, since their escape could threaten public order or national security. This section, part of the IPC's chapter on offences relating to the escape of prisoners, was designed to hold negligent or corrupt jailers and officials strictly accountable, ensuring that those trusted with custody did not deliberately help such important prisoners flee.

Common misconceptions

Myth: This section applies to any public servant who lets any regular criminal escape.
Fact: It specifically covers only 'State prisoners' and 'prisoners of war', not ordinary criminal suspects or convicts, who are covered by other IPC sections.
Myth: A guard can be punished even if the escape was accidental or due to carelessness.
Fact: The section requires that the public servant 'voluntarily' allowed the escape, meaning intentional or deliberate facilitation, not mere negligence.