Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter X: Of Contempts of the Lawful Authority of Public Servants
Section 176: Omission to give notice or information to public servant by person legally bound to give it
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
Intentionally failing to give a notice or information to a public servant as legally required is punishable with simple imprisonment for up to one month, or a fine of up to five hundred rupees, or both.
- If the information concerns an offence, its prevention, or catching an offender, the punishment is up to six months, or a fine of up to one thousand rupees, or both.
- If required by an order under sub-section (1) of section 565 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, it is imprisonment of either description for up to six months, or a fine of up to one thousand rupees, or both.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Whoever, being legally bound to give any notice or to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, intentionally omits to give such notice or to furnish such information in the manner and at the time required by law, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both; or, if the notice or information required to be given respects the commission of an offence, or is required for the purpose of preventing the commission of an offence, or in order to the apprehension of an offender, 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; [or, if the notice or information required to be given is required by an order passed under sub-section (1) of section 565 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (5 of 1898), with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 176
- Surinder Mohan & Ors v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Anil Dutt Sharma v. Shri Subhasish Panda & Ors
- Prof Dr Neelima Risbud and Ors v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr
- Ramaiah @ Rama v. State of Karnataka
- Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid v. State of Maharashtra
- M/S. Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. S.U.T.N.I. Sangam & Ors.
- Mohmed Amin @ Amin Choteli Rahim Miyan Shaikh & Anr. v. C.B.I Through Its Director
- Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India and Anr.
- People'S Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India and Anr.
- R. Sai Bharathi v. J. Jayalalitha and Ors.
- K.K. Patel and Anr. v. State of Gujarat and Anr.
- K.R. Patel (Dead) Through L.Rs. v. Commissioner of Income Tax
- Bihar Public Service Commission and Anr. Etc. v. Dr. Shiv Jatan Thakur and Ors. Etc.
- State of Karnataka v. Union of India & Another
- Raghav Prap._Anna Tripathi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- R. K. Dalm.Ia v. Delhi Administration
- Province of Bombay v. Kusaldas S. Advani and Others