Home  /  Prevention of Corruption Act  /  Section 15

Section 15: Punishment for attempt

Prevention of Corruption Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1988
Section 14 All 31 Sections of Prevention of Corruption Act Section 16

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 15

Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 punishes the inchoate offense of attempt to commit criminal misconduct. Following the 2018 Amendment, it specifically penalizes any person who attempts to commit the offense of criminal misconduct referred to in Section 13(1)(a) (dishonest or fraudulent misappropriation or conversion of property entrusted to a public servant), prescribing imprisonment extending up to 3 years and fine.

  • Statutory Demarcation of Attempt: Delineates the critical boundary between mere preparation (which is non-punishable unless specifically criminalized) and attempt, requiring an overt act proximate to the actual commission of criminal misconduct.
  • Post-2018 Scope: Confined to attempts to commit misappropriation or fraudulent conversion under Section 13(1)(a); post-2018 attempts to demand undue advantage are directly prosecuted under Section 7 itself, which expressly criminalizes 'attempts to obtain'.
  • Mens Rea & Proximity Test: Prosecution must establish both the specific criminal intent to misappropriate entrusted public funds/assets and an overt step that would have resulted in complete conversion but for extraneous intervention or failure.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar AIR 1961 SC 1698: A 3-Judge Bench held that a person commits the offense of attempt when he intends to commit that offense, and although he fails, he takes an overt step towards such commission; preparation ceases and attempt begins the moment an act is done towards the execution of the criminal purpose with that intention.
  • State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yakub (1980) 3 SCC 57: The Supreme Court laid down the proximity test for attempt, holding that the measure of proximity is not determined solely by time or place, but by the direct relation between the overt act done and the ultimate evil intended, beyond the point of repentance (locus poenitentiae).
  • K.C. Builders v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2004) 2 SCC 731: The Supreme Court affirmed that an attempt to commit a financial or corruption offense requires an actual, overt, conscious effort to execute the prohibited misconduct, and cannot be founded on mere internal clerical deliberations or preliminary administrative file movements.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In defending an attempt charge under Section 15, dissect the prosecution evidence to establish that the public servant's actions were still in the realm of administrative preparation, inter-departmental consultation, or query raising. Show that the accused maintained the locus poenitentiae (the opportunity to withdraw) and that no irrevocable steps causing wrongful loss or conversion of entrusted public funds occurred.

Section 14 All 31 Sections of Prevention of Corruption Act Section 16