LegalGurus.in
⚖️ BNS · Section 317

Dishonestly receiving stolen property

This provision is now IPC Section 411 (Dishonestly receiving stolen property) under the Indian Penal Code, effective from 1 July 2024. FIRs registered after that date cite the new section number.

What does this section state?

This section continues IPC Section 411 into the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita without substantive change, punishing anyone who dishonestly receives or retains property knowing, or having reason to believe, it to be stolen. The punishment remains up to three years' imprisonment, or a fine, or both.

As under the earlier provision, "reason to believe" remains a lower threshold than direct proof of knowledge, and can be inferred from suspicious circumstances surrounding how the property was acquired — an unusually low price, an unreliable source, or the absence of any proper documentation.

This section applies to conduct occurring on or after 1 July 2024, with earlier cases continuing to be tried under IPC Section 411.
Punishment Imprisonment up to 3 years, or fine, or both
Triable By Any Magistrate
Bailable Bailable
Cognizable Cognizable
Compoundable Non Compoundable

Frequently Asked Questions

Is BNS Section 317 bailable?

This is a bailable offence, meaning bail can generally be granted as a matter of right by the police or the court.

What is the punishment under this section?

Imprisonment up to 3 years, or fine, or both. Courts have discretion based on the facts of each case, and the actual outcome can vary.

Can a case under this section be compounded (settled)?

No — this is a non-compoundable offence. The complainant cannot withdraw the case by private settlement; prosecution continues regardless of any compromise.

Does "reason to believe" require actual knowledge?

No — as under the earlier IPC provision, reason to believe is a lower threshold than proof of actual knowledge, and can be established through suspicious surrounding circumstances alone.

Can a shopkeeper be charged under this section for buying stolen goods unknowingly?

Only if the circumstances gave them reason to believe the goods were stolen — genuinely unknowing and reasonable purchases, made without any suspicious indicators, would not meet the threshold for this offence.

Is this compoundable, and if so under what conditions?

This offence is generally treated as non-compoundable, consistent with its treatment under the earlier IPC Section 411, given the underlying stolen property it involves.

Facing a case under this section?

Get a free case assessment from a verified criminal lawyer.

Talk to a Criminal Lawyer

This page is for general information only and is not a substitute for advice from a qualified advocate. Always verify against the current official bare act.