Criminal Law (BNS 2023) MCQs for Judiciary, Page 6

Correct answer: B. Under Section 192 BNS, a person who is aware that an unlawful assembly has been commanded to disperse by law and who joins or continues in that assembly is guilty of a specific offence punishable with imprisonment up to 2 years, or fine, or both

Section 192 BNS 2023 (Section 151 IPC): 'Whoever knowingly joins or continues in any assembly of five or more persons, after such assembly has been lawfully commanded to disperse, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both: Provided that this section shall not apply to any member of such assembly who is, at the time of commanding it to disperse, a member of the armed forces of India while acting in conformity with his duty as such.' The dispersal command procedure is under Section 163 BNSS 2023 (corresponding to Section 144 CrPC for prohibitory orders and Section 129-132 CrPC for dispersal of unlawful assemblies). Section 163 BNSS gives the Executive Magistrate power to command dispersal and use force. Rioters who continue after the dispersal command are charged under Section 192 BNS in addition to any substantive offences committed.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 192 / BNSS 2023 Section 163

Correct answer: B. Imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to 10 years and fine; the punishment for conspiracy to commit offences against the state is very severe even if the actual offence is not committed

Section 170 BNS 2023 (corresponding to Section 121A IPC): 'Whoever within or without India conspires to commit any of the offences punishable by Section 147 or Section 148, or conspires to overawe by means of criminal force or show of criminal force, the Central Government or any State Government shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.' The high punishment for conspiracy to commit offences against the state reflects the potential national security consequences. Section 147 BNS: waging or attempting to wage war against India = death or life imprisonment. Section 148 BNS: collecting arms, ammunition, or otherwise preparing to wage war = life imprisonment or up to 10 years. These provisions interact with the UAPA 1967 and the National Security Act 1980 which provide additional administrative detention and prosecution mechanisms for national security threats.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 170

Correct answer: B. The prosecution must prove: a lawful order was promulgated by a public servant; the accused had knowledge of the order.

Section 196 BNS 2023 (Section 188 IPC): 'Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his management, disobeys such direction, shall, if such disobedience causes or tends to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any persons lawfully employed, be punished...' Section 196 has been widely used to prosecute violations of orders under Section 144 CrPC (now Section 163 BNSS) and Covid-19 related prohibitory orders. Key: The accused must have KNOWLEDGE of the order; publication in the official gazette or in a local newspaper creates constructive notice. The word 'promulgated' means the order was made known through the appropriate official means (publishing, putting up in public places, broadcasting).

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 196

Correct answer: B. False evidence requires: the person must be bound by oath or express provision of law to state the truth; the person states something they believe to be false or do not believe to be true; in any judicial proceeding, examination, or investigation

Section 229 BNS 2023 (Section 191 IPC): 'Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth, or being bound by law to make a declaration upon any subject, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, is said to give false evidence.' Essential elements: (1) BOUND BY OATH or express provision of law: the false statement must be made under legal compulsion to state truth (being a witness in court, a deponent in an affidavit, a person making a statutory declaration); (2) FALSE STATEMENT: the statement must be factually wrong; (3) KNOWLEDGE or BELIEF: the person knew it was false OR did not believe it to be true. Important: Section 229 BNS covers false statements in ANY judicial proceeding, examination by a public servant legally bound to require truth, or any arbitration. Section 230 BNS: fabricating false evidence = creating evidence knowing it to be false. Punishment under Section 231 BNS: up to 7 years imprisonment plus fine.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 229

Correct answer: B. Where the underlying offence is punishable with death, the punishment for causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information is rigorous imprisonment up to 7 years and fine; where the offence is punishable with life imprisonment, the punishment is up to 5 years imprisonment and fine

Section 238 BNS 2023 (Section 201 IPC): 'Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false, shall, if the offence which he knows or believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine, or, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any other term, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for that offence, or with fine, or with both.' This proportionate scaling recognises that obstructing justice in serious cases is itself a serious offence.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 238

Correct answer: B. The prosecution must prove: a false charge of an offence was made against a specific person; the accused knew the charge to be false or had no just or lawful ground for the charge.

Section 243 BNS 2023 (Section 211 IPC): 'Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.' Enhanced punishment where the false charge is of an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of 7 or more years: up to 7 years imprisonment plus fine. Section 243 BNS is used to prosecute persons who misuse the criminal justice system to harass innocent people by filing false FIRs or making false complaints. The prosecution of the original complainant under Section 243 can only begin after the accused in the original case is acquitted, as otherwise both proceedings will be pending simultaneously, creating complications.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 243

Correct answer: B. A private conversation between two lawyers about the merits of a case

Section 229 BNS covers false statements made: (1) In a judicial proceeding (court or tribunal); (2) Before a public servant required by law to take oaths; (3) In any examination authorised by law. A PRIVATE CONVERSATION between lawyers (Option B) is not a proceeding before any official body; no oath is administered; there is no legal requirement of truth. This cannot constitute 'false evidence' under Section 229 BNS regardless of whether the statements made are untrue. Compare: a statement on affidavit before a Civil Court (Option C) is covered because affidavits are sworn statements under oath before an authorised officer; a statement before a Magistrate under Section 174 BNSS (inquest) is covered as it is an examination before a public servant. Under Section 229 Explanation, statements made in any investigation directed by law are also included.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 229

Correct answer: B. The person issuing or signing the certificate must know or believe that the certificate is false in a material point; an innocent error does not constitute the offence

Section 236 BNS 2023 (Section 197 IPC): 'Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true any such certificate, knowing the same to be false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.' Section 235 BNS (Section 196 IPC): 'Whoever knowingly uses as true any certificate issued under Section 229, which he knows or has reason to believe to be false in any material point, commits the same offence as giving false evidence.' The KNOWLEDGE requirement means the issuer must be aware of the falsity. If a doctor genuinely and reasonably believes the medical condition stated in a certificate is true but it turns out to be false, the doctor has not committed Section 236 BNS because the requisite knowledge of falsity is absent. The 'material point' requirement means the falsity must be on a point that matters to the purpose of the certificate; a minor inaccuracy on an immaterial point does not constitute the offence.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 236

Correct answer: B. The person must dishonestly make a false claim to property in court that he knows he has no right to; the false claim must be made fraudulently in a court of justice

Section 241 BNS 2023 (Section 209 IPC): 'Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly, or with intent to injure or annoy any person, makes in a Court of Justice any claim which he knows to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine.' Key elements: (1) The claim must be made in a COURT OF JUSTICE; (2) It must be a CLAIM TO PROPERTY or right (not a claim in a general legal sense); (3) It must be made FRAUDULENTLY or DISHONESTLY; (4) The person must KNOW the claim to be false. Section 241 BNS is used in civil cases where a party fraudulently claims ownership of property they know belongs to someone else. The combination of Section 241 BNS and Section 316 BNS (criminal breach of trust) or Section 318 BNS (cheating) may be charged when a person uses court proceedings to advance fraudulent property claims. Courts have applied this section sparingly to avoid chilling legitimate but unsuccessful litigation.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 241

Correct answer: B. Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 7 years and fine; the punishment applies to both giving false evidence and fabricating false evidence

Section 231 BNS 2023 (Sections 193-194 IPC): Punishment for false evidence: (1) If given in a JUDICIAL PROCEEDING: imprisonment of either description up to 7 years AND fine; (2) If given in any OTHER proceeding: imprisonment of either description up to 3 years AND fine. Section 230 BNS (Section 192 IPC): fabricating false evidence: punishment same as Section 231. The enhanced punishment for false evidence in judicial proceedings (7 years) vs other proceedings (3 years) reflects the greater gravity of corruption of the judicial process. In Samant N. Balkrishna v. George Fernandes (1969 SC), the Supreme Court discussed the scope of false evidence in the context of election petitions. The punishment under Section 231 BNS represents a significant deterrent against perjury in Indian courts, though the law is not always vigorously enforced in practice.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 231

Correct answer: B. Section 262 BNS covers: intentional insult to a public servant sitting in any stage of a judicial proceeding; intentional interruption to any public servant so sitting.

Section 262 BNS 2023 (Section 228 IPC): 'Whoever intentionally offers any insult, or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.' This section covers INSULT and INTERRUPTION directed at public servants (judges, magistrates) during judicial proceedings. It is distinct from criminal contempt of court (Contempt of Courts Act 1971) which covers a broader range of conduct (scandalising the court, obstructing justice). Section 262 BNS is used for in-court disruptions; the Contempt Act is used for broader acts including publications that scandalise the court. In Smt. Ujjam Bai v. State of UP (1963 SC), the Supreme Court distinguished between criminal contempt and acts under Section 228 IPC.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 262

Correct answer: B. Document includes electronic and digital records and other recorded forms.

Section 2(8) BNS 2023 (corresponding to Section 29 IPC): 'Document means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used as evidence of that matter; and includes electronic or digital record.' This expansion is critical for modern forgery cases: (1) Forged digital signatures on electronic contracts; (2) Manipulation of digital bank statements or financial records; (3) Creation of fake email headers or phishing emails; (4) Alteration of digitally stored government records (land records, certificates); (5) Deepfake documents created using AI. Under the IT Act 2000, Section 66C (identity theft) and Section 66D (cheating by personation using computer resources) also apply, but the BNS forgery provisions now directly apply to digital documents, allowing prosecution under the substantive criminal code rather than only the IT Act.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 2(8) / BNS Section 336

Correct answer: B. Section 340 BNS (corresponding to Section 467 IPC) applies when the forgery is of documents of special importance: a valuable security, a will, an authority to adopt a son, a receipt for any payment of money or delivery of valuable property, a certificate of government, a public servant's certificate, or a document purporting to be a record of court proceedings; the punishment is enhanced to imprisonment up to life or imprisonment up to 10 years plus fine

Section 340 BNS 2023 (Section 467 IPC): 'Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, movable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any valuable security or other property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.' The enhanced punishment (up to life imprisonment) for forging these documents reflects their importance in society: forged wills disinherit legitimate heirs; forged valuable securities undermine financial markets; forged court records corrupt the administration of justice. This contrasts with Section 338 BNS (Section 465 IPC): general forgery = up to 2 years imprisonment plus fine.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 340

Correct answer: B. Imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to 10 years and fine; counterfeiting Indian currency is treated as a very serious offence undermining the national economy

Section 178 BNS 2023 (Section 232 IPC): 'Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, Indian coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.' Related provisions: Section 179 BNS (counterfeiting coin): imprisonment up to 7 years plus fine; Section 181 BNS (selling counterfeit coin): imprisonment up to 5 years plus fine; Section 182 BNS (having possession of counterfeited coin with intent to use): imprisonment up to 3 years plus fine. The severe punishment for counterfeiting Indian coin (up to life imprisonment) reflects the gravity of undermining the monetary system of the nation. Under the BNS, coins of foreign countries (which had separate provisions under the IPC) are still covered but some of the colonial-era provisions about specific foreign coins have been removed.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 178

Correct answer: B. Imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment up to 10 years and fine; counterfeiting currency notes is treated as one of the most serious economic crimes

Section 183 BNS 2023 (Section 489A IPC): 'Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any currency note or bank note, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.' The punishment matches that for counterfeiting Indian coin (Section 178 BNS). Related provisions: Section 184 BNS (selling counterfeit currency note or bank note): imprisonment up to life or rigorous imprisonment up to 10 years plus fine; Section 185 BNS (using as genuine a forged or counterfeit currency note or bank note): imprisonment up to 7 years plus fine; Section 186 BNS (possession of forged or counterfeit currency note or bank note knowing the same to be forged or counterfeit): imprisonment up to 7 years plus fine. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) handles cases involving large-scale counterfeiting of Indian currency, which is treated as an offence threatening national security.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 183

Correct answer: B. Imprisonment up to 7 years and fine; the enhanced punishment applies when the forgery was specifically committed for the purpose of cheating another person

Section 341 BNS 2023 (Section 468 IPC): 'Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.' The difference from general forgery (Section 338 BNS: up to 2 years): Section 341 BNS requires proof of the specific purpose of CHEATING, which elevates it to a more serious offence (up to 7 years). This is commonly charged in cases involving: (1) forged bank documents used to obtain loans; (2) forged educational certificates to obtain employment; (3) forged power of attorney to transfer property fraudulently. Sections 341 and 342 BNS (forgery for harm) are often charged together with Section 318 BNS (cheating) to comprehensively address fraud involving forged documents.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 341

Correct answer: B. Whoever, being a clerk, officer, or servant, or employed or acting in the capacity of a clerk, officer, or servant, willfully, and with intent to defraud, destroys, alters, mutilates, or falsifies any book, electronic record, paper, writing, valuable security or account which belongs to or is in the possession of his employer, or has been received by him for or on behalf of his employer, or willfully, and with intent to defraud, makes or abets the making of any false entry in, or omits or alters or abets the omission or alteration of any material particular from or in, any such book, electronic record, paper, writing, valuable security or account, shall be punished with imprisonment up to 7 years or fine or both

Section 347 BNS 2023 (Section 477A IPC) is an important provision for cases of corporate fraud and financial crimes. Elements: (1) The accused must be a CLERK, OFFICER, SERVANT or acting in such capacity (employee relationship); (2) WILFULLY with INTENT TO DEFRAUD: the act must be deliberate and aimed at fraud; (3) FOUR ACTS: destroying, altering, mutilating, or FALSIFYING any account book, paper, electronic record, etc. belonging to or received on behalf of the employer; (4) OR making false entries or omitting/altering material particulars in such records. The expansion to include ELECTRONIC RECORDS in Section 347 BNS (unlike Section 477A IPC) is significant for corporate fraud in the digital age. The offence overlaps with: Section 316 BNS (criminal breach of trust by employees); the Companies Act 2013 (Section 447 on fraud); and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in serious financial crime cases.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 347

Correct answer: B. The accused must have made or published a statement of fact (not opinion); the statement must impute something to a specific identifiable person.

Section 356 BNS 2023 (Section 499 IPC): 'Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.' Essential elements: (1) WORDS/SIGNS: spoken, written, or by visible representations; (2) IMPUTATION: an allegation of fact (not merely an expression of opinion); (3) CONCERNING A SPECIFIC PERSON: the person must be identifiable; (4) INTENT TO HARM or KNOWLEDGE that harm to reputation will result; (5) PUBLICATION: communication to at least one person other than the person defamed. Section 356 has 10 EXCEPTIONS: truth published for public good, fair comment on public conduct, report of court proceedings, fair criticism of published works, etc. In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 221, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 356 / Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016)

Correct answer: B. Under Section 356 Exception 1, truth is only a defence when it was published or imputed for the public good; truth published to merely harm a person without any public benefit does not attract the exception

Section 356 BNS 2023 Exception 1 (Section 499 Exception 1 IPC): 'It is not defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person, if it be for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.' This differs from English and American defamation law where TRUTH is generally a COMPLETE DEFENCE to defamation. In Indian criminal law, truth must serve the PUBLIC GOOD. Examples: (1) Truth published for public good: exposing a politician's criminal history (public interest); (2) Truth not for public good: disclosing a private person's past embarrassing but legally immaterial personal matter merely to damage their reputation. In criminal proceedings, the accused defamer claiming the truth defence must prove: (a) the imputation is true; AND (b) publishing it was for the public good. The requirement of 'public good' shows that Indian criminal defamation law values reputation highly and requires affirmative justification beyond mere truth.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 356 Exception 1

Correct answer: B. The acts must be deliberate and malicious; they must be intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

Section 298 BNS 2023 (Section 295A IPC): 'Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs, commits any act, makes any gesture, or sound, or delivers any spoken words, or places any object in the sight of others, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.' Key: DELIBERATE AND MALICIOUS INTENTION is required. In Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP (AIR 1957 SC 620), the Supreme Court upheld Section 295A IPC as constitutionally valid and held that the section is limited to cases of 'aggravated form of insult to religion' committed with the specific intent to outrage. Section 298 BNS also requires malice; a bona fide scholarly criticism, a film review, or artistic expression even if offensive to some does not satisfy the malice requirement unless the primary purpose is to outrage religious feelings.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 298 / Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP (AIR 1957 SC)

Correct answer: B. The Hicklin test: whether the material tends to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands the publication may fall; Indian courts have also applied a community standards test asking whether the average reasonable person in India would find the material to appeal to prurient interest

Section 292 BNS 2023 (Section 292 IPC) defines obscenity: 'A book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation, figure or any other object shall be deemed to be obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect, or (where it comprises two or more distinct items) the effect of any one of its items, is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.' The HICKLIN TEST (R v. Hicklin, 1868) focuses on tendency to deprave and corrupt the most vulnerable. The COMMUNITY STANDARDS TEST (used by US courts) asks whether an average person applying contemporary community standards would find the material to have prurient appeal. In Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1964 SC), the Supreme Court applied the Hicklin test. In Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014 SC), the Court shifted towards a contemporary community standards approach.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 292 / Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014 SC)

Correct answer: B. The act must be done with the intent to insult the religion of any class or with knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, or defilement as an insult to their religion

Section 295 BNS 2023 (Section 295 IPC): 'Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.' The DUAL mental element: (1) INTENT to insult the religion; OR (2) KNOWLEDGE that persons are likely to consider the act as an insult to their religion. The knowledge requirement is important: if vandalism of a religious site is purely for theft (e.g., stealing the gold dome) without any intent to insult the religion, Section 295 BNS may not apply though Section 308 BNS (robbery) or Section 323 BNS (mischief) would. The Ayodhya dispute and subsequent events have generated extensive jurisprudence on the protection of places of worship.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 295

Correct answer: B. The exception applies when the imputation is made in good faith for the protection of the interests of the person making it or of another person or for the public good; the key is bona fide intent and proportionality of the disclosure to the interest protected

Section 356 BNS 2023 Exception 9 (Section 499 Exception 9 IPC): 'It is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another provided that the imputation be made in good faith for the protection of the interests of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good.' Example applications: (1) A landlord telling a prospective landlord that a prospective tenant is dishonest (protection of the recipient's interests); (2) A former employer giving an honest reference about a former employee's misconduct to a prospective employer; (3) A doctor warning medical colleagues about a dangerous medication without full knowledge. The GOOD FAITH requirement is critical: dishonest or malicious imputations cannot shelter under Exception 9. In Chaman Lal v. State of Punjab (1970 SC), the Supreme Court discussed the good faith requirement in defamation exceptions, holding that good faith requires due care and attention, not mere absence of malice.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 356 Exception 9

Correct answer: B. The act must be done with the intent to wound the feelings of any person or to insult the religion of any person or with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely to be wounded or religion is likely to be insulted

Section 297 BNS 2023 (Section 297 IPC): 'Whoever, with the intention of wounding the feelings of any person, or of insulting the religion of any person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place of worship or on any place of sepulture or any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance to any persons assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.' Four categories of acts covered: (1) Trespass in a place of worship or burial; (2) Offering indignity to a human corpse; (3) Causing disturbance to funeral ceremonies; (4) Profaning a place set apart for funeral rites. The mental element is particularly important for Option (2): desecrating a corpse for criminal purposes (like destroying evidence) may not attract Section 297 BNS but would attract other provisions.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 297

Correct answer: B. The IPC had no specific provision on organised crime syndicates or their facilitators; such persons were charged under general conspiracy (Section 120B IPC) or abetment (Section 107 IPC) provisions; Section 111 BNS creates a specific offence covering the entire organised crime network including perpetrators, facilitators, and financiers

Section 111(2) BNS 2023: 'Whoever is a member of an organised crime syndicate shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.' Section 111(3) BNS: 'Any person who facilitates, or is a party to, any organised crime, whether or not he is a member of the organised crime syndicate, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.' Section 111(4) BNS: financing of organised crime is separately punishable. This comprehensive coverage of the entire organised crime ecosystem (perpetrators, members, facilitators, financiers) is modelled on international anti-organised crime frameworks like the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) 2000.

Source note: BNS 2023 Section 111(2)(3)(4)