IPC 65 vs BNS 65
● Retained in BNSLimit to imprisonment for non-payment of fine
Section 65 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, sets a limit to the term of imprisonment that can be imposed in default of payment of a fine. It provides that if an offender is sentenced to both imprisonment and a fine, and he fails to pay the fine, the additional imprisonment in default shall not exceed one-fourth of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offense.
This section ensures proportionality and fairness. Without such a limitation, offenders could face excessive imprisonment for mere inability to pay fines, which would amount to double punishment. For example, if an offense is punishable with a maximum of 4 years’ imprisonment, then in default of fine, the additional imprisonment cannot exceed 1 year.
The rationale is to strike a balance between enforcing fines and preventing undue hardship. It ensures that default imprisonment is used as a deterrent, not as a means of over-penalizing. This provision has historically protected offenders from arbitrary sentencing while maintaining the seriousness of paying fines as ordered by courts.
Thus, IPC 65 acts as a safeguard against excessive punishment and upholds the principle of proportionality in criminal sentencing.
Limit to imprisonment for non-payment of fine
Section 65 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, corresponds directly to Section 65 of the IPC. It retains the same principle that imprisonment in default of payment of fine shall not exceed one-fourth of the maximum imprisonment term prescribed for the offense.
By retaining this provision, the BNS continues the safeguard against disproportionate sentencing. Courts must ensure that imprisonment in default of fine is fair, proportionate, and consistent with the law. This prevents undue hardship, especially for offenders who may not have the financial means to pay large fines.
The section reinforces the dual objectives of punishment: deterrence and fairness. While fines remain a valid form of punishment, their enforcement must not convert into excessive imprisonment. BNS 65 thus preserves judicial discretion while ensuring limits are not crossed.
This continuity shows that the legislature recognized the importance of this safeguard in protecting against excessive penal consequences. In practice, BNS 65 functions identically to IPC 65, making the law simpler and ensuring fairness in sentencing.
What changed?
This provision was carried over to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita with substantially the same wording — the section was renumbered from IPC IPC 65 to BNS BNS 65.