BNS S.2 defines 39 terms used throughout the Sanhita. These definitions are not merely glossary entries. They are operative: an offence provision that uses the word "dishonestly" imports the entire definition in S.2(7), and the prosecution must prove every element of that definition. Misreading a definition is the fastest way to misapply the substantive offence.
BNS S.2 consolidates IPC sections 6 to 52A into a single section with 39 clauses. The substance is largely preserved, but the numbering is entirely different. Each clause number below is the BNS clause, with the IPC equivalent noted.
The Most Examined Definitions
| Clause | Term | Definition (condensed) | IPC Equivalent |
|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | Act | Denotes a single act as well as a series of acts | IPC S.33 |
| (3) | Child | Any person below eighteen years of age | New; IPC had no single definition |
| (7) | Dishonestly | Doing anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another | IPC S.24 |
| (8) | Document | Any matter expressed on any substance by letters, figures or marks, including electronic and digital record | IPC S.29 (expanded) |
| (9) | Fraudulently | Doing anything with the intention to defraud but not otherwise | IPC S.25 |
| (11) | Good faith | Done or believed with due care and attention | IPC S.52 |
| (14) | Injury | Any harm illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property | IPC S.44 |
| (15) | Illegal / legally bound | "Illegal" applies to everything which is an offence, prohibited by law, or furnishes ground for a civil action | IPC S.43 |
| (21) | Movable property | Property of every description except land and things attached to the earth | IPC S.22 |
| (24) | Offence | A thing made punishable by this Sanhita (with extensions) | IPC S.40 |
| (26) | Person | Includes any company or association, whether incorporated or not | IPC S.11 |
| (28) | Public servant | A person falling under enumerated descriptions (twelve categories) | IPC S.21 (expanded) |
| (29) | Reason to believe | Sufficient cause to believe a thing, but not otherwise | IPC S.26 |
| (31) | Valuable security | A document creating, extending, transferring, restricting, extinguishing or releasing a legal right | IPC S.30 |
| (33) | Voluntarily | Causing an effect by means intended to cause it, or known or had reason to believe likely to cause it | IPC S.39 |
| (36) | Wrongful gain | Gain by unlawful means of property to which the person is not legally entitled | IPC S.23 |
| (37) | Wrongful loss | Loss by unlawful means of property to which the person is legally entitled | IPC S.23 |
| (39) | IT Act and BNSS definitions | Words not defined here but defined in the IT Act 2000 or BNSS 2023 carry those meanings | New |
Key Definitions Explained
Dishonestly (S.2(7))
The intention to cause wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another. It is disjunctive: either gain or loss suffices, and both need not be proved.
Why the disjunctive matters: A person who destroys another's property with no intention of gaining anything himself still acts dishonestly if he intends to cause wrongful loss. The word covers both acquisitive and purely destructive conduct.
Fraudulently (S.2(9))
Doing anything with the intention to defraud but not otherwise.
Why "but not otherwise" matters: An act done for any purpose other than defrauding is not fraudulent even if it incidentally causes loss. The word narrows liability to deliberate deception.
Distinction: Dishonestly vs Fraudulently
| Basis | Dishonestly | Fraudulently |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Wrongful gain or wrongful loss | Intention to defraud |
| Deception required | No; the loss may be caused by force or stealth | Yes; fraud implies deception |
| Example offence | Theft (taking with intent to cause wrongful gain/loss) | Cheating (inducing delivery of property by deception) |
| Overlap | A person acting fraudulently also acts dishonestly, but not necessarily vice versa | Fraudulently is a subset of dishonestly where deception is the mechanism |
Good Faith (S.2(11))
Nothing is said to be done or believed in good faith which is done or believed without due care and attention.
Why this is a negative definition: The law does not say what good faith is; it says what is not good faith. The effect is that the accused must show positive diligence, not mere honesty of intention. A person who acts honestly but carelessly does not act in good faith.
Reason to Believe (S.2(29))
A person has reason to believe a thing if he has sufficient cause to believe it, but not otherwise.
How it differs from knowledge: Knowledge is actual awareness. Reason to believe is objective: would the facts available to the accused give a reasonable person sufficient cause to believe? The accused need not actually believe; it is enough that the facts gave him sufficient cause.
Voluntarily (S.2(33))
A person causes an effect voluntarily when he causes it:
- By means intended to cause it, or
- By means which he knew or had reason to believe likely to cause it.
Why voluntarily is wider than intention alone: It includes both intentional causation and causation with knowledge or reason to believe. This is critical for homicide: under BNS S.100, culpable homicide may be committed with knowledge alone, not only with intention.
Public Servant (S.2(28))
Twelve categories covering commissioned officers, judges, court officers, assessors, arbitrators, officers empowered to confine, government officers, revenue officers, local authority officers, election officers, and persons in government service or pay.
Key additions over IPC S.21: Clause (k)(ii) now explicitly covers persons in the service or pay of a local authority, a corporation established under a Central or State Act, or a government company. This resolves earlier doubts about whether employees of statutory corporations were public servants.
New Definitions in BNS S.2 (Not in IPC)
| Clause | Term | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| (3) | Child (below 18) | A single definition replacing scattered references |
| (8) | Document includes electronic and digital record | Expanded from IPC S.29; no longer needs a separate reading with the IT Act |
| (39) | Cross-reference to IT Act and BNSS | Avoids definitional gaps for technological terms |
Recall Check
- What is the difference between "dishonestly" and "fraudulently"?
- Why is good faith defined negatively?
- How does "reason to believe" differ from "knowledge"?
- What does "voluntarily" include beyond intention?
Distinctions
| Basis | Knowledge | Reason to Believe |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | Subjective: actual awareness | Objective: sufficient cause available to the accused |
| Proof | Must show the accused actually knew | Must show the facts gave sufficient cause; actual belief need not be proved |
| Culpability | Higher | Lower |
| Example provision | BNS S.101(d): knows the act is so imminently dangerous | BNS S.317(2): having reason to believe the property is stolen |
| Basis | Wrongful Gain | Wrongful Loss |
|---|---|---|
| Direction | Gain by unlawful means of property to which the gainer is not legally entitled | Loss by unlawful means of property to which the loser is legally entitled |
| Includes | Retaining wrongfully as well as acquiring wrongfully | Being kept out of property as well as being deprived of it |
| Relationship | Disjunctive in "dishonestly": either suffices | Same |
Flashcards
Define "dishonestly" under BNS S.2(7).
Doing anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another.
How does "fraudulently" differ from "dishonestly"?
Fraudulently requires an intention to defraud (implying deception). Dishonestly requires only an intention to cause wrongful gain or loss (no deception needed).
What is "good faith" under S.2(11)?
Nothing is done in good faith which is done without due care and attention. It is a negative definition requiring positive diligence.
Define "voluntarily" under S.2(33).
A person causes an effect voluntarily if he causes it by means intended to cause it, or by means he knew or had reason to believe likely to cause it.
What is "reason to believe" under S.2(29)?
Sufficient cause to believe a thing, but not otherwise. It is an objective standard based on the facts available.
Does "person" include a company under BNS S.2?
Yes. S.2(26) includes any company or association, whether incorporated or not.
Exam Scenario
Problem: Govind, a clerk in a government company, takes Rs. 2 lakhs from the company safe, intending to use it for a weekend and return it on Monday. He is caught on Monday morning before he can return the money. He argues he acted "in good faith" because he always intended to return it. The prosecution charges him with criminal breach of trust under BNS S.316(5) (by a public servant). Advise on: (a) whether Govind is a "public servant"; (b) whether he acted "dishonestly"; and (c) whether his defence of "good faith" succeeds.
Step 1: Test whether Govind is a public servant under S.2(28)
S.2(28)(k)(ii) covers a person in the service or pay of a government company as defined in the Companies Act 2013 S.2(45).
Govind is a clerk in a government company. He falls squarely within clause (k)(ii). He is a public servant.
Step 2: Test dishonesty under S.2(7)
"Dishonestly" means doing anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another.
| Element | On these facts |
|---|---|
| Wrongful gain | Govind gained the use of Rs. 2 lakhs to which he was not entitled. Temporary gain is still gain under S.2(38): "retaining wrongfully" suffices |
| Wrongful loss | The company was kept out of its own money for two days |
| Intention | He intended to use the money for himself; his intention to return does not negate the intention to gain temporarily |
He acted dishonestly.
Step 3: Defeat the good faith defence under S.2(11)
Good faith requires due care and attention. Taking Rs. 2 lakhs from a company safe without authorisation is not an act done with due care. No amount of honest intention to return can supply the due care that is missing.
The defence fails.
Temporary misappropriation is still dishonest. S.2(38) includes "retaining wrongfully" alongside "acquiring wrongfully". The weekend use is wrongful gain for a time, and that suffices.
Good faith is not honesty of intention. S.2(11) requires due care and attention, not merely honest belief. A person who takes money without authority does not exercise due care, however honestly he intends to return it.
Conclusion. Govind is a public servant, acted dishonestly, and cannot claim good faith. The charge under BNS S.316(5) is made out.
See Also
- Actus Reus and Mens Rea : how these definitions supply the mental element of specific offences.
- Punishments under the BNS : the punishments that follow once the definitional elements are satisfied.
- Criminal Misappropriation and Criminal Breach of Trust : the substantive offence that uses "dishonestly" and "public servant".