Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVII: Of Offences against Property · Of extortion
Section 388: Extortion by threat of accusation of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, etc
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024.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
Extortion by threatening to accuse a person or another of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or up to ten years, or of inducing someone to commit one, is punishable with imprisonment of either description for up to ten years, and a fine. If the threatened accusation is under section 377, it can be punished with imprisonment for life.
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 commits extortion by putting any person in fear of an accusation against that person or any other, of having committed or attempted to commit any offence punishable with death, or with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, or of having attempted to induce any other person to commit such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if the offence be one punishable under section 377 of this Code, may be punished with [imprisonment for life].
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 388
- Leena Paulose v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr
- Sunil Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Avtar Singh Kocchar @ Dolly v. The State of NCT of Delhi
- Avtar Singh Kocchar @ Dolly v. Enforcement Directorate
- Jai Prakash Singhal v. Directorate of Enforcement
- Jai Prakash Singhal v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Pinky Irani v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
- Vikram Kathuria v. State
- Pooja Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement
- B. Mohan Raj v. The State of NCT of Delhi
- Leena Paulose v. Statae of Delhi
- Kamlesh Kothari v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr
- Zakia Ahsan Jafri v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
- Vikram Singh@ Vicky &Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.