top of page

IPC Section 39

IPC Section 39 defines the punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment.

IPC Section 39 – Punishment for Attempting Certain Offences

IPC Section 39 addresses the punishment for attempting to commit offences that are punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment. It is important because it ensures that even incomplete or unsuccessful attempts to commit serious crimes are legally punishable, thereby deterring criminal behavior at its early stages.

This section plays a crucial role in criminal law by emphasizing that the intention and attempt to commit a grave offence are themselves punishable, even if the crime is not completed. It helps maintain law and order by discouraging attempts that could lead to serious harm.

IPC Section 39 – Exact Provision

In simple terms, this means that if someone tries to commit a serious offence punishable by imprisonment or fine, but does not succeed, the court can still punish them. The punishment can be up to one-fourth of the maximum imprisonment prescribed for the actual offence. This ensures that attempts are not left unpunished.

  • Applies to attempts of offences punishable with life imprisonment or other imprisonment.

  • Allows punishment up to one-fourth of the maximum term prescribed for the offence.

  • Includes punishment by fine or imprisonment or both.

  • Focuses on the attempt, not just the completed crime.

Purpose of IPC Section 39

The main legal objective of IPC Section 39 is to deter individuals from attempting serious crimes by ensuring that attempts themselves are punishable. It recognizes that an attempt to commit a grave offence poses a threat to society, even if the crime is not completed. This provision helps uphold public safety by addressing criminal intentions and actions at an early stage.

  • Discourages attempts to commit serious offences.

  • Ensures legal consequences even if the crime is not completed.

  • Protects society by addressing dangerous intentions.

Cognizance under IPC Section 39

Cognizance under Section 39 is generally taken when there is clear evidence of an attempt to commit a punishable offence. Courts examine the facts to determine whether the accused had the intention and took steps towards committing the offence.

  • Cognizance is taken when an attempt is proved beyond reasonable doubt.

  • Requires evidence of overt acts towards committing the offence.

  • Courts assess whether the attempt was substantial enough to warrant punishment.

Bail under IPC Section 39

Offences under IPC Section 39 are generally non-bailable because they relate to attempts to commit serious crimes. However, bail may be granted depending on the nature of the original offence attempted and the circumstances of the case.

  • Bail is not a matter of right; it depends on the offence attempted.

  • Court considers the gravity of the original offence.

  • Bail may be granted if the attempt is minor or circumstances justify it.

Triable By (Which Court Has Jurisdiction?)

The trial for offences under IPC Section 39 depends on the nature of the original offence attempted. If the original offence is triable by a Sessions Court, then the attempt will also be tried by the Sessions Court. Similarly, if the offence is triable by a Magistrate, the attempt is tried by the Magistrate.

  • Sessions Court tries attempts of serious offences triable by Sessions Court.

  • Magistrate tries attempts of offences triable by Magistrate.

  • Jurisdiction aligns with the original offence's trial court.

Example of IPC Section 39 in Use

Suppose a person tries to commit robbery, which is punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years. The person plans and takes steps to rob a bank but is caught before completing the act. Under IPC Section 39, the court can punish the person for the attempt, with imprisonment up to 2.5 years (one-fourth of 10 years). If the attempt was minor or lacked clear intent, the punishment might be less or bail granted.

In contrast, if the attempt was well-planned and close to completion, the court is likely to impose a stricter sentence. This example shows how Section 39 punishes attempts to commit serious crimes, even if unsuccessful.

Historical Relevance of IPC Section 39

IPC Section 39 has its roots in the original Indian Penal Code drafted in 1860. It was designed to address the gap where attempts to commit serious crimes were not adequately punished. Over time, courts have interpreted this section to ensure that criminal attempts receive proportionate punishment.

  • 1860: IPC enacted including Section 39 on attempts.

  • Landmark cases clarified the scope of 'attempt' under this section.

  • Judicial interpretations have expanded understanding of punishable attempts.

Modern Relevance of IPC Section 39

In 2025, IPC Section 39 remains crucial in criminal jurisprudence. Courts continue to rely on it to punish attempts at serious offences, maintaining deterrence. The section supports modern law enforcement by addressing preparatory acts that threaten public safety.

  • Courts apply Section 39 to evolving crimes like cyber offences.

  • Supports preventive justice by punishing attempts early.

  • Enhances social security by discouraging criminal attempts.

Related Sections to IPC Section 39

  • Section 511 – Punishment for attempting offences not otherwise provided for

  • Section 40 – Attempt to commit offences punishable with death

  • Section 41 – Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life

  • Section 120B – Criminal conspiracy (related to attempts)

  • Section 34 – Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention

Case References under IPC Section 39

  1. State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George (1965 AIR 722, SC)

    – The Supreme Court held that an attempt requires a direct movement towards commission of the offence after preparations.

  2. R v. Shivpuri (1986 AIR 180, HL)

    – The House of Lords ruled that an attempt to commit an impossible crime is still punishable under attempt provisions.

  3. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984 AIR 1622, SC)

    – Clarified the difference between preparation and attempt for criminal liability.

Key Facts Summary for IPC Section 39

  • Section:

    39

  • Title:

    Punishment for Attempting Certain Offences

  • Offence Type:

    Non-bailable; Cognizable

  • Punishment:

    Up to one-fourth of maximum imprisonment prescribed for the offence, or fine, or both

  • Triable By:

    Magistrate or Sessions Court depending on original offence

Conclusion on IPC Section 39

IPC Section 39 plays a vital role in Indian criminal law by ensuring that attempts to commit serious offences do not go unpunished. It bridges the gap between intention and completed crime by providing a legal basis to punish attempts proportionately. This helps deter criminal behavior at an early stage and protects society from potential harm.

As crime methods evolve, Section 39 remains relevant by addressing attempts in various contexts, including modern offences. Its balanced approach to punishment supports justice while considering the degree of the attempt. Overall, it strengthens the criminal justice system's ability to maintain law and order.

FAQs on IPC Section 39

What does IPC Section 39 cover?

It covers punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment, allowing courts to penalize incomplete crimes.

Is an attempt under Section 39 always punishable?

Yes, if the attempt is proven beyond reasonable doubt and relates to a serious offence, the court can impose punishment under this section.

Can bail be granted for offences under Section 39?

Bail is not automatic; it depends on the nature of the original offence and case circumstances. Courts decide on a case-by-case basis.

Which court tries offences under IPC Section 39?

The trial court depends on the original offence's jurisdiction—either a Magistrate or Sessions Court.

How is the punishment determined under Section 39?

The punishment can extend up to one-fourth of the maximum imprisonment prescribed for the original offence, or fine, or both.

Related Sections

IPC Section 472 defines the offence of using as genuine a forged document, detailing its scope and punishment.

CrPC Section 404 details the procedure for issuing a proclamation to a person absconding or concealing to avoid legal process.

CrPC Section 481 details the procedure for the Supreme Court to review its own judgments or orders under specific conditions.

IPC Section 191 defines the offence of giving false evidence, penalizing those who knowingly provide false testimony in judicial proceedings.

IPC Section 354A addresses sexual harassment and defines its scope and punishment under Indian law.

CrPC Section 257 empowers courts to order the disposal of seized property in criminal cases after trial completion.

IPC Section 348 defines wrongful confinement in a place of worship or religious assembly to outrage religious feelings.

IPC Section 226 addresses the offence of voluntary causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means, defining scope and punishment.

IPC Section 199 covers the procedure for complaints related to defamation, specifying who can file and how courts take cognizance.

CrPC Section 166A mandates police to record complaints of sexual offences promptly and initiate investigation without delay.

CrPC Section 340 outlines the procedure for initiating inquiry into offences related to defamation.

CPC Section 19 details the procedure for transferring suits from one court to another for convenience or justice.

bottom of page