Section 356 BNS — Criminal Defamation Law in India: Complete 2026 Guide

What is Section 356 BNS?

Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 defines and punishes criminal defamation in India. When the BNS came into force on 1 July 2024, it replaced the entire Indian Penal Code 1860 — including Sections 499 and 500, which previously governed defamation.

In plain terms, a person commits criminal defamation under BNS 356 when they make or publish a false statement about another person — through words spoken, written, signs, or visible representations — intending to harm that person's reputation, or knowing that the statement will do so.

The offence is bailable, non-cognisable, and compoundable, meaning it requires a court complaint (not a police FIR), the parties can negotiate and withdraw the case before trial, and the accused can get bail as of right.

How BNS 356 Differs from IPC 499/500

The shift from IPC to BNS was primarily a structural consolidation. The substantive law of defamation has not changed dramatically, but there are key differences worth understanding:

All pending cases that were filed under IPC 499/500 before 1 July 2024 continue under the old provisions. New complaints filed after that date must invoke BNS 356.

Elements of Criminal Defamation Under BNS 356

To constitute criminal defamation under Section 356 BNS, four essential elements must all be present. A complaint will fail if any one is missing:

1. 1
   Imputation of fact about a person. The statement must relate to a specific, identifiable person — not a vague or general group. The imputation must be of a factual nature, not a mere expression of opinion. Calling someone "incompetent" as a pure opinion may not suffice; stating they "forged documents" is an imputation of fact.
2. 2
   Made or published. The statement must be communicated to at least one person other than the person defamed. A statement made solely to the defamed person (with no third party present) does not meet this element. Publication includes speaking in public, posting on social media, sending a group message, or publishing in print or online.
3. 3
   Intent to harm reputation, or knowledge that it will. The accused must have intended to harm the reputation of the person, or known or had reason to believe the statement would do so. This is the mental element (mens rea). Accidental or unwitting statements made in good faith may not satisfy this element.
4. 4
   Harm to reputation (actual or likely). The imputation must lower the person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, or expose them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. This is assessed objectively — courts look at whether a reasonable person would consider the statement capable of damaging the complainant's reputation.

Punishment Under Section 356 BNS

Section 356 BNS prescribes the following punishment for criminal defamation:

Key characteristics of the offence:

• →Bailable: The accused is entitled to bail as a matter of right. Police cannot detain without bail.
• →Non-cognisable: Police cannot arrest the accused without a court warrant. The complainant must approach a Magistrate, not a police station.
• →Compoundable: The case can be settled and withdrawn with the Magistrate's permission — making pre-litigation settlements (via legal notices) especially effective.

Exceptions to Defamation Under BNS 356 — All 10 Listed

Section 356 BNS preserves all 10 exceptions from IPC 499. If any of these exceptions apply, the statement does not constitute defamation even if all four elements are otherwise met:

1. 1
   Truth for public good. Imputation of true facts is not defamation if made for the public good. Truth alone is not enough — the public benefit must be demonstrable. (Exception 1)
2. 2
   Opinion on public conduct of a public servant. Fair comment on the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of public duties, or on their character insofar as it appears in that conduct, is not defamation. (Exception 2)
3. 3
   Opinion on conduct of a person touching a public question. Fair comment in good faith on any person's conduct in respect of a public question is not defamation. (Exception 3)
4. 4
   Fair report of court proceedings. Publication of a substantially true report of court proceedings, or the result of a court case, is not defamation. (Exception 4)
5. 5
   Merits of a case decided by a court. Expressing an opinion in good faith on the merits of a case decided by a court, or on the conduct of the parties, witnesses, or advocates, is not defamation. (Exception 5)
6. 6
   Fair comment on literary or artistic work. In good faith criticism of the merits of a published book, painting, musical composition, or public performance is not defamation. (Exception 6)
7. 7
   Censure in good faith by a person with lawful authority. Censure passed in good faith by a person who has lawful authority over another (e.g., an employer giving a performance review) is not defamation. (Exception 7)
8. 8
   Accusation made in good faith to a lawful authority. Making an accusation to an authorised body (e.g., a complaint to the police or a regulator) in good faith is not defamation. (Exception 8)
9. 9
   Imputation made in good faith for protection of interests. An imputation made in good faith for the protection of the interests of the person making it, or for the public good, is not defamation. (Exception 9)
10. 10
    Caution made in good faith. A caution given in good faith to a person about another, for the good of the person being cautioned or for the public good, is not defamation. (Exception 10)

The burden to prove an exception lies on the accused. Claiming an exception is an affirmative defence — the accused must demonstrate it applies.

Landmark Defamation Cases in India (Recent)

These cases shaped how defamation law is applied in India — many decided under IPC 499/500 but with principles fully applicable under BNS 356:

Civil vs Criminal Defamation — Which Route for Which Case?

India allows both criminal prosecution under BNS 356 and a civil tort claim for defamation simultaneously. Here is how to decide:

Practical advice: In most cases, the first step — regardless of which route you ultimately take — is to send a formal defamation legal notice. This gives the other party an opportunity to retract and apologise, which is often the fastest resolution. A well-drafted notice also creates the evidentiary record you need for either a civil suit or a criminal complaint.

How to Send a Defamation Legal Notice Under BNS 356

Before filing a criminal complaint or civil suit, sending a defamation legal notice is strongly recommended — and in many cases leads to a faster resolution. Here is the process:

1. 1.Document the defamatory statement — screenshots, recordings, published material — with date and context.
2. 2.Have a qualified advocate draft a formal notice citing Section 356 BNS, stating the exact statement, demanding retraction, a public apology, and compensation within 15–30 days.
3. 3.Send the notice via Speed Post / RPAD to the respondent's last known address. Courts presume delivery once posted.
4. 4.If the respondent complies — retracts and apologises — the matter ends here. If not, you proceed to file a Magistrate complaint or civil suit.

vakiltech's advocates draft defamation legal notices citing the exact BNS provisions, with the correct demands and a firm tone — delivered by registered post within 24 hours.