- Published on
KembaraXtra - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Section 224: Threat of Injury to Public Servant
Introduction
Section 224 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) protects public servants from threats intended to influence the way they perform their public functions.
The section applies where a person threatens:
- A public servant; or
- A person in whom the accused believes that public servant to be interested,
with the purpose of inducing the public servant to:
- Do an act;
- Forbear from doing an act; or
- Delay doing an act,
where that act is connected with the exercise of the public servant’s official functions.
The central formula is:
THREAT OF INJURY + PUBLIC SERVANT/INTERESTED PERSON + PURPOSE TO INFLUENCE PUBLIC FUNCTION = SECTION 224
Q1. What does Section 224 punish?
Answer:
Section 224 punishes a person who:
- Holds out a threat of injury;
- The threat is directed either:
- To a public servant; or
- To a person in whom the accused believes that public servant to be interested;
- The purpose is to induce the public servant to:
- Do an act;
- Forbear from doing an act; or
- Delay doing an act;
- The act must be connected with the exercise of the public servant’s public functions.
Q2. What is the object of Section 224?
Answer:
The object is to ensure that public servants are able to exercise their official functions without being subjected to threats or intimidation.
The provision protects:
- Independence of public administration;
- Proper discharge of official duties;
- Freedom of public servants from coercive pressure;
- Lawful exercise of public functions.
Core Principle
PUBLIC DUTY MUST NOT BE CONTROLLED BY THREATS
Q3. Which IPC provision corresponds to Section 224 BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
Section 224 BNS = Section 189 IPC
Q4. Has Section 224 changed under the BNS?
Answer:
According to the supplied comments:
- The language remains unchanged; and
- The provision has been retained as it is.
Q5. What are the essential ingredients of Section 224?
Answer:
The essential ingredients are:
- There must be a threat of injury;
- The threat must be directed to:
- A public servant; or
- A person in whom the accused believes the public servant to be interested;
- The threat must be made for the purpose of inducing the public servant:
- To do an act;
- To forbear from doing an act; or
- To delay doing an act;
- The act must be connected with the exercise of the public servant’s public functions.
Formula
THREAT + PUBLIC SERVANT/CONNECTED PERSON + DO/FORBEAR/DELAY + PUBLIC FUNCTION = 224
Q6. What is the prohibited act?
Answer:
The prohibited act is:
HOLDING OUT A THREAT OF INJURY
Q7. Is actual injury required?
Answer:
No.
The section punishes the threat itself, provided it is made for the specified coercive purpose.
Q8. Is every threat to a public servant covered?
Answer:
No.
The threat must be made for the specific purpose of influencing an act connected with the public servant’s official functions.
A purely private threat unrelated to official duty would not fall within Section 224 merely because the victim happens to be a public servant.
Q9. To whom may the threat be directed?
Answer:
There are two possibilities:
- Directly to the public servant; or
- To a person in whom the accused believes that the public servant is interested.
Q10. Why does the section include persons in whom the public servant is interested?
Answer:
Because pressure on a public servant may be applied indirectly.
For example, a person may threaten someone close to the public servant in order to influence the servant’s official decision.
The law therefore covers both direct and indirect coercion.
Q11. Must the public servant actually be interested in that other person?
Answer:
The statutory wording focuses on a person:
“IN WHOM HE BELIEVES THAT PUBLIC SERVANT TO BE INTERESTED”
Therefore, the accused’s belief is relevant.
Q12. What does “interested” broadly mean here?
Answer:
It refers to a person whose injury the accused believes would matter to the public servant and could therefore be used as leverage.
Q13. What is the required purpose of the threat?
Answer:
The threat must be made to induce the public servant to:
DO
or
FORBEAR
or
DELAY
an act connected with his public functions.
Q14. What does “do any act” mean?
Answer:
It means to pressure the public servant into taking an official action.
Memory
DO = ACT
Q15. What does “forbear” mean?
Answer:
It means to abstain from doing an act.
Memory
FORBEAR = DON’T ACT
Q16. What does “delay” mean?
Answer:
It means to postpone an official act.
Memory
DELAY = ACT LATER
Q17. Why are “do,” “forbear,” and “delay” all included?
Answer:
Because coercion can operate in three directions:
- Force an official to act;
- Force an official not to act;
- Force an official to postpone action.
Memory
DO – DON’T – DELAY
Q18. Must the act be connected with public functions?
Answer:
Yes.
This is a central requirement.
The threatened conduct must relate to:
THE EXERCISE OF THE PUBLIC FUNCTIONS OF THE PUBLIC SERVANT
Q19. Is a threat concerning a private matter covered?
Answer:
No, not under this section merely because the threatened person is a public servant.
The intended influence must concern public functions.
Q20. Give a simple example of compelling action.
Answer:
A threatens a licensing officer with injury unless the officer approves A’s application.
If the threatened approval is connected with the officer’s public functions, Section 224 may apply.
Q21. Give an example of inducing forbearance.
Answer:
A threatens a public servant unless the officer stops taking lawful enforcement action.
This may amount to an attempt to induce the public servant to forbear from exercising official functions.
Q22. Give an example of inducing delay.
Answer:
A threatens an officer unless the officer postpones a lawful official action.
If the statutory ingredients are present, Section 224 may apply.
Q23. Give an example involving a person close to the public servant.
Answer:
A tells a public officer:
“If you proceed with this lawful official action, I will injure your brother.”
If A believes the officer is interested in his brother and makes the threat to influence the officer’s public function, Section 224 may apply.
Q24. Must the threat succeed?
Answer:
No.
The public servant need not actually comply.
The section focuses on the purpose for which the threat is made.
Q25. Must the public servant actually feel fear?
Answer:
The supplied wording does not separately require proof of actual fear.
The key elements are the threat and its coercive purpose.
Q26. Must the public servant actually alter his conduct?
Answer:
No express requirement of altered conduct appears.
The offence can arise even if the officer refuses to yield.
Q27. Must the threat be verbal?
Answer:
The supplied wording does not limit the threat to spoken words.
The essential point is that a threat of injury is held out.
Q28. Must the threat be made face to face?
Answer:
No such restriction appears in the supplied text.
Q29. Must the threat be made directly by the accused?
Answer:
The section is framed around the person who “holds out” the threat.
The key issue is whether the accused is responsible for communicating or conveying the threat for the prohibited purpose.
Q30. Is actual violence required?
Answer:
No.
Actual violence is not required.
The offence is complete on the threat, assuming the other ingredients are proved.
Q31. Is dishonest intention required?
Answer:
No.
The statute does not use the word “dishonestly.”
The controlling mental element is the purpose of inducing the public servant to act, forbear, or delay.
Q32. Is fraudulent intention required?
Answer:
No.
Fraud is not an express ingredient.
Q33. Is malicious intention required?
Answer:
No.
Malice is not separately stated.
Q34. Is financial gain required?
Answer:
No.
The offence may be committed even where the accused seeks no financial benefit.
Q35. Is the legality of the desired act relevant?
Answer:
The section focuses on influencing the exercise of public functions through threats.
Whether the accused is seeking an official to act, refrain, or delay, the key wrong is the coercive interference with public duty.
Q36. What if the accused asks an officer to do something lawfully but uses a threat to obtain it?
Answer:
The threat may still fall within Section 224 if its purpose is to induce the public servant to act in relation to public functions.
The section targets the coercive method, not merely the ultimate objective.
Q37. What if the public servant was already planning to perform the act?
Answer:
That does not necessarily remove liability.
The relevant question is whether the accused held out the threat for the purpose of inducing the official conduct.
Q38. What if the public servant ignores the threat completely?
Answer:
The offence may still be established because actual success is not expressly required.
Q39. What is the punishment under Section 224?
Answer:
The offender may be punished with:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 2 YEARS
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Q40. Is there a minimum imprisonment term?
Answer:
No minimum term is stated in the supplied provision.
Q41. Is there a maximum fine specified?
Answer:
No maximum fine amount is provided in the supplied text.
Therefore, no separate fine ceiling should be invented.
Q42. What is the classification of Section 224?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
- Non-Cognizable
- Bailable
- Any Magistrate
Q43. Is Section 224 cognizable?
Answer:
No.
NON-COGNIZABLE
Q44. Is Section 224 bailable?
Answer:
Yes.
BAILABLE
Q45. Which Court may try the offence?
Answer:
According to the supplied classification:
ANY MAGISTRATE
Q46. What is the easiest classification memory?
Answer:
224 = NC + BAILABLE + ANY MAGISTRATE
Q47. What public interest does Section 224 protect?
Answer:
It protects the independent and lawful functioning of public administration by preventing threats from dictating official conduct.
Q48. What is the central wrong under Section 224?
Answer:
The central wrong is:
USING A THREAT OF INJURY TO CONTROL THE EXERCISE OF PUBLIC FUNCTIONS
Q49. What is the easiest problem-question test?
Answer:
Ask:
- Was there a threat of injury?
- Was it directed at a public servant or someone the accused believed the public servant was interested in?
- Was the purpose to induce the public servant to:
- Do;
- Forbear; or
- Delay an act?
- Was that act connected with public functions?
If yes:
SECTION 224 MAY APPLY
Q50. What are the key words to remember?
Answer:
THREAT
PUBLIC SERVANT
INTERESTED PERSON
DO
FORBEAR
DELAY
PUBLIC FUNCTION
Q51. What is the shortest memory formula?
Answer:
“THREATEN PUBLIC SERVANT TO CONTROL OFFICIAL ACTION = SECTION 224.”
Q52. How does Section 224 differ from Section 225?
Answer:
Section 224
The threat is used to influence:
THE PUBLIC SERVANT
directly or indirectly.
The purpose is to make the public servant:
- Do;
- Forbear; or
- Delay an official act.
Section 225
The threat is used against:
THE PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
to stop that person from approaching a competent public servant.
Memory
224 = THREAT OFFICIAL
225 = THREAT PERSON SEEKING HELP
Q53. How does Section 224 differ from Section 226?
Answer:
Section 224
Means of pressure:
THREAT OF INJURY
Section 226
Means of pressure:
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUICIDE
Both concern interference with public functions, but the method of coercion differs.
Q54. What common theme connects Sections 224–226?
Answer:
All three provisions protect the functioning of public authority from coercion.
Section 224
Threat the public servant.
Section 225
Threat the person seeking protection.
Section 226
Use suicide attempt to pressure the public servant.
Memory
224 = THREAT AUTHORITY
225 = BLOCK ACCESS TO AUTHORITY
226 = COERCE AUTHORITY BY SUICIDE ATTEMPT
Key Provisions (Study Notes)
1. Prohibited Conduct
The accused must:
HOLD OUT A THREAT OF INJURY
2. Possible Target of Threat
The threat may be directed to:
PUBLIC SERVANT
or
PERSON IN WHOM ACCUSED BELIEVES PUBLIC SERVANT IS INTERESTED
3. Specific Purpose
The purpose must be to induce the public servant to:
DO
FORBEAR
or
DELAY
an act.
4. Official Connection
The relevant act must be connected with:
EXERCISE OF PUBLIC FUNCTIONS
5. Actual Compliance Not Required
The public servant need not yield to the threat.
The coercive purpose is the central feature.
Essential Ingredients — Rapid Recall
THREAT OF INJURY
+
PUBLIC SERVANT / INTERESTED PERSON
+
PURPOSE TO INDUCE
+
DO / FORBEAR / DELAY
+
PUBLIC FUNCTION
= SECTION 224
Punishment Notes
Section 224 provides:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 2 YEARS
or
FINE
or
BOTH
Classification Notes
According to the supplied material:
NON-COGNIZABLE
BAILABLE
ANY MAGISTRATE
IPC Equivalent and BNS Position
According to the supplied comments:
Section 224 BNS = Section 189 IPC
The language remains unchanged and the provision has been retained as it is.
Section 224 vs Section 225 vs Section 226
Section 224
THREAT PUBLIC SERVANT / INTERESTED PERSON
Purpose:
CONTROL OFFICIAL ACTION
Punishment:
UP TO 2 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Section 225
THREAT PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
Purpose:
STOP LEGAL APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION
Punishment:
UP TO 1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH
Section 226
ATTEMPT SUICIDE
Purpose:
COMPEL OR RESTRAIN PUBLIC SERVANT
Punishment:
SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT UP TO 1 YEAR / FINE / BOTH / COMMUNITY SERVICE
Best Three-Section Memory
224 = THREAT THE OFFICIAL
225 = THREAT THE APPLICANT
226 = THREAT THROUGH SELF-HARM
Quick Revision Notes
Section
224 BNS
Title
Threat of injury to public servant
IPC Equivalent
Section 189 IPC
Act
Hold out threat of injury.
Target
Public servant or person in whom accused believes public servant is interested.
Purpose
Induce public servant to:
- Do;
- Forbear; or
- Delay an act.
Context
Act connected with exercise of public functions.
Actual Success
Not expressly required.
Punishment
Up to 2 years / fine / both.
Classification
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Any Magistrate
BNS Change
No substantive change stated.
Exam Traps
Trap 1 — Treating every threat to a public servant as Section 224
Incorrect.
The threat must be aimed at influencing the exercise of public functions.
Trap 2 — Forgetting indirect threats
The threat may be aimed at:
A PERSON IN WHOM THE ACCUSED BELIEVES THE PUBLIC SERVANT IS INTERESTED
Trap 3 — Requiring actual injury
Incorrect.
Threat alone may suffice.
Trap 4 — Requiring the public servant to comply
Incorrect.
Actual success is not expressly necessary.
Trap 5 — Forgetting “delay”
The section covers not only doing or forbearing, but also:
DELAYING OFFICIAL ACTION
Trap 6 — Confusing private and official matters
The act sought to be influenced must be connected with:
PUBLIC FUNCTIONS
Trap 7 — Confusing Section 224 with Section 225
Remember:
224 = THREAT PUBLIC SERVANT
225 = THREAT PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
Trap 8 — Confusing Section 224 with Section 226
Remember:
224 = THREAT OF INJURY
226 = SUICIDE ATTEMPT AS COERCION
Trap 9 — Inventing a fixed fine ceiling
No maximum fine amount was supplied.
Rapid Revision Link: Sections 224–227
224 = THREAT PUBLIC SERVANT
225 = THREAT PERSON SEEKING PROTECTION
226 = SUICIDE ATTEMPT TO COERCE PUBLIC SERVANT
227 = GIVE FALSE EVIDENCE
This creates a useful transition:
PROTECT OFFICIAL ACTION → PROTECT ACCESS TO OFFICIAL HELP → PROTECT OFFICIALS FROM EXTREME COERCION → PROTECT TRUTH IN EVIDENCE
Ultimate Memory Formula
SECTION 224
THREAT OF INJURY
+
PUBLIC SERVANT / PERSON OF INTEREST
+
PURPOSE TO MAKE PUBLIC SERVANT
DO / FORBEAR / DELAY
+
ACT CONNECTED WITH PUBLIC FUNCTION
= UP TO 2 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
Key Takeaway
Section 224 BNS protects public servants from threats intended to influence the exercise of their public functions.
The essence of the offence is:
THREAT OF INJURY
+ PUBLIC SERVANT OR CONNECTED PERSON
+ PURPOSE TO INDUCE DO / FORBEAR / DELAY
+ PUBLIC FUNCTION
The threat need not actually be carried out, and the public servant need not yield to the pressure.
According to the supplied comments:
Section 224 BNS = Section 189 IPC
and the provision has been retained without substantive change.
The punishment is:
IMPRISONMENT OF EITHER DESCRIPTION UP TO 2 YEARS / FINE / BOTH
and the offence is:
Non-Cognizable + Bailable + Triable by Any Magistrate
Final Memory Line
“224 = THREAT A PUBLIC SERVANT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO MAKE HIM DO, NOT DO, OR DELAY AN OFFICIAL ACT.”
