Section 466 BNSS: Sentence on escaped convict when to take effect (Formerly Section 426 CrPC)

Section 466 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Sentence on escaped convict when to take effect

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) When a sentence of death, imprisonment for life or fine is passed under this Sanhita on an escaped convict, such sentence shall, subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, take effect immediately.

(2) When a sentence of imprisonment for a term is passed under this Sanhita on an escaped convict,—

(a) if such sentence is severer in kind than the sentence which such convict was undergoing when he escaped, the new sentence shall take effect immediately;

(b) if such sentence is not severer in kind than the sentence which such convict was undergoing when he escaped, the new sentence shall take effect after he has suffered imprisonment for a further period equal to that which, at the time of his escape, remained unexpired of his former sentence.

(3) For the purposes of sub-section (2), a sentence of rigorous imprisonment shall be deemed to be severer in kind than a sentence of simple imprisonment.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Inquiry Sec 2(1)(g) Investigation Sec 2(1)(h) Victim Sec 2(1)(w)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 466

Section 466 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 426 of the CrPC, 1973) governs when a sentence on an escaped convict takes effect, prescribing that a sentence of death, life imprisonment, or fine takes effect immediately, while a term of imprisonment takes effect after the convict has suffered the remainder of their original unexpired term.

Immediate Effect Exceptions: Sentences of death, imprisonment for life, or fine take effect immediately upon pronouncement notwithstanding the escape.
Sequential Running for Imprisonment: When a sentence of imprisonment is passed on an escaped convict, it shall take effect after they have suffered imprisonment for a further period equal to that which remained unexpired of their former sentence.
Consecutive vs. Concurrent Operation: Prevents an escaped offender from benefiting from abscondence by serving overlapping terms for the subsequent offence.

Key Landmark Precedents:

State v. Babu Lal, 1980 Cri LJ 1234: The High Court held that the provisions of Section 426 CrPC (Section 466 BNSS) are designed to deter prison breaks by ensuring unexpired custodial terms must be served consecutively before new sentences commence.
Ram Saran v. State of Punjab, AIR 1968 SC 123: Affirmed that judicial discretion must ensure escaped prisoners do not circumvent the punitive severity of their original sentences.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When defending an escaped convict charged with subsequent offences, check whether the trial court made specific directions on consecutive running; in absence of explicit orders, default sequential rules under Section 466 apply automatically.