BACK TO SECTIONS
IPC 1860REPEALED

Section 131-140

Offences Relating to the Armed Forces: Abetment of Mutiny; Attempt to Seduce Soldier; Abetment of Assault on Superior Officer; Abetment of Desertion; Harbouring Deserter; Deserter Concealment

Replaced by: BNS 153-160

Non-BailableCognizable: YesCourt of Session
THE STATUTE

Original Text

Section 131: Whoever abets the committing of mutiny by an officer, soldier, sailor or airman, in the Army, Navy or Air Force of India, shall, if mutiny be committed in consequence of that abetment, be punished with imprisonment for life or any shorter term, or shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Section 132: Whoever abets the commission of any act of mutiny by any officer, soldier, sailor or airman in the Army, Navy or Air Force of India, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine...

Simplified

Sections 131–140 protect the discipline and cohesion of India's armed forces from civilian interference. These provisions make it a serious crime for civilians to encourage, assist, or conspire with military personnel to commit mutiny, desertion, or insubordination. Section 131 (abetment of mutiny causing actual mutiny) carries life imprisonment. Section 132 (abetment even if no mutiny follows) carries up to 10 years. Sections 136–139 address the civilian side of military desertion — harbouring a deserter, concealing a deserter, and resistng the apprehension of deserters are all criminal offences. These provisions ensure the military's command structure cannot be undermined from civilian society. Courts-martial continue to have jurisdiction over the actual military offences under the Army Act, Navy Act, and Air Force Act; the IPC provisions target civilian enablers.

Legal Evolution

Sections 131-140 on mutiny and military discipline were central to colonial governance, providing a civilian criminal law framework to supplement the Army Act for offences by and against military personnel. These provisions were particularly significant given the 1857 Mutiny, which preceded the IPC's enactment by three years. The colonial drafters were acutely aware that civilian criminal law needed to reinforce military discipline and prevent seditious incitement of soldiers.

Landmark Precedents

Union of India v. Major General Madan Lal Yadav (1996)

(1996) 4 SCC 127
RELEVANCE

Civilian IPC provisions for military abetment coexist with the armed forces' own disciplinary jurisdiction — both frameworks apply to the same underlying conduct.

Practical Scenarios

"A political agitator who approaches soldiers and urges them to refuse orders from their superiors — Section 132 (abetment of mutiny)."
"A family member who hides a deserting soldier and helps him evade military police — Section 136 (harbouring deserter)."

Common Queries

Yes — Sections 131–140 specifically target civilian conduct that undermines military discipline. A civilian who persuades, pays, or assists a soldier to desert or mutiny faces IPC prosecution.