Attempt to Murder in Indian Law: From IPC Section 307 to BNS, and the Role of Abetment (Section 109)

Attempt to Murder in Indian Law: 

In the eyes of the law, trying to kill someone and actually killing them are not worlds apart. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and now the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) treat attempt to murder as a crime almost as serious as murder itself — because when the intention is to take a life, the danger is just as real.

But what happens when someone encourages, plans, or helps carry out that attempt, even if they don’t strike the blow? That’s where Section 109 of the IPC (and now BNS) comes in — punishing those who abet the crime.

In old law IPC Section 307?

Under the old law, Section 307 IPC punished anyone who attempted to commit murder. This meant:

• The act must be done with the intention or knowledge that it could cause death.
• The person must have taken a step beyond mere planning — such as an attack, firing a weapon, or poisoning — even if it fails.

Punishment: Up to 10 years, and in some cases life imprisonment, with or without fine.

the New Law Under BNS (2023)

Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section 110 replaces IPC Section 307.

The spirit of the law remains the same:

• Intent to kill + an overt act = Attempt to murder.
• Punishment: Still up to life imprisonment, depending on the severity and use of deadly weapons.

addition: The BNS emphasizes mental intent, clarity of action, and distinguishes "mere threats" from actual attempts.

What Is Section 109 IPC / BNS (Abetment)?

Imagine someone doesn’t physically attack a victim but:

• Pays someone to do it,
• Encourages it, or
• Helps plan the murder.

They can be charged under Section 109 IPC, now Section 62 of the BNS — abetment of an offence.

If the main offence (like attempt to murder) is committed, the abettor faces the same punishment as the main offender, unless there’s a separate provision for abetment

 the Ground Related case laws 

1. Surender v. State of Haryana (2020)

In this case, the accused directly attacked the victim with a weapon, while his accomplice had provoked and planned the attack. The court held both guilty — one under Section 307 IPC, the other under Section 109 for abetting the attempt.

2. Om Prakash v. State of U.P. (2012)

The accused fired a gun at the victim but missed. The Supreme Court still convicted him under Section 307, because the intent and danger were clear.

3. State of Maharashtra v. Kashirao (2003)

This case dealt with the conspiracy angle. Though the main accused didn’t carry out the act himself, he was found to have masterminded the plan. He was convicted under Section 109 along with the attacker under Section 307.

Important Legal Ground: What Courts Look For

Whether under IPC or BNS, courts consider:

• Weapon used (knife, firearm, poison, etc.)
• Part of body targeted (head, chest, vital organs)
• Extent of injury (if any)
• Circumstantial evidence of planning or instigation

No injury? Still guilty. Even if the attempt fails or causes no harm, if the intent to kill is proven, it still qualifies as an attempt to murder.

The Law Sees Beyond the Act

Attempting to take a life — or helping someone else do it — is treated with utmost seriousness by Indian courts. The transition from IPC to BNS hasn’t diluted this stance; in fact, it has modernized it by sharpening the focus on intention, evidence, and role clarity.

Whether you're the hand that attacks or the mind that plots it — the law doesn’t turn a blind eye.