Chapter - 3
General Exceptions
Sec. 14 to 44
OBJECT OF THIS CHAPTER - 3 OF BNS, 2023
● The Criminal liability must attach only when a person acts with a guilty mind (mens
rea) and without lawful justification or excuse.
● To protects persons whose acts, though causing harm, are done without wrongful
intent, or under lawful authority, or in circumstances excused by necessity.
● It prevents punishment where it would be unjust or unreasonable, recognizing
human limitations and lawful duties.
● Criminal justice must account for context, motive, and capacity not merely the act
itself.
BURDEN OF PROOF
● Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the general rule is that the
prosecution bears the burden of proof to establish the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
● However, Section 108 provides that the burden of proof lies on the claimant when
any legal right or liability is asserted by that person.
GENERAL EXCEPTION
Excusable acts Justifiable acts
1. Mistake of Fact (Sections-14 & 17) 1. Judicial Acts (Sections-15 & 16)
2. Accident (Section-18) 2. Necessity [Acts done to Avoid Greater Harm]
(Section-19)
3. Infancy (Sections-20 & 21)
3. Consent (Section-25 to 29)
4. Insanity (Section-22) 4. Acts done in Good-faith (Section-30)
5. Intoxication or Drunkenness (Sections-23 5. Communication made in Good-faith (Section-31)
6. Act done under Compulsion or Threat (Section-32)
& 24)
7. Acts causing Slight Harm or Trifling Acts
(Section-33)
8. Right of Private Defence (Sections-34 to 44)
Mistake of Fact (Sections-14 & 17)
● Mistake = commission or omission of an act ignorantly or unintentionally causing injury or damage to
another/others.
● Mistake is one of the defences available to the accused to get exemption from criminal liability, but, it
must not be due to desire or pre-arrangement.
❖ Conditions
• An act must be done by a person resulting in harm.
• That act must be done by a person in good faith.
• Person doing that act is bound by law to do that act (Sec-76). (justified by law - Section-79)
• Person doing that act must believe himself bound by law.
• That belief must be the result of mistake of fact, not by mistake of law.
(Ignorantia facti excusat, ignorantia juris non-excusat.)
Important Case laws
R. vs. Mrs. Talson (1889) 23 QBD 168- Talson was charged with bigamy u/s. 57 Offences Against Person Act. 1881.
● Contracting a second marriage during the lifetime of her former husband.
● She was acquitted on the grounds good faith.
● On reasonable grounds that her husband had died prior to the time of her second marriage.
(Bonafide belief on reasonable grounds is a defence for mistake)
R. vs. Prince (1875)LR 2 CCR 154 - Accused liable for abduction of a girl under 16 years age.
● He believed in good faith and on reasonable grounds that she was over 16 years.
● A mistaken belief even though based on reasonable grounds over 16 years no defence.
● to a charge of kidnapping taking a girl out of the possession against the will of her parents.
(When the mere act is punishable, person doing that act will not be allowed to claim mistake of fact)
R. VS. Rosi - A boy of 21 years was charged for committing murder of his father.
● His father frequently used to quarrel with his mother..
● night incident took place quarrel between the accused father and mother.
● accused mother called out murder,
● father forced the mother to the up of stairs and threatened to knife her,
● He Believing that his mothers be danger.
● Accused not guilty of murder.
● He honestly believed his mother life was in imminent danger, he fired was of solules necessary.
Sec 17 of BNS Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself
justified, by law.
● Nothing is an offence
● which is done by any person
● who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and
● not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith,
● believes himself to be justified by law, in doing it.
Explanation:
If someone sincerely thinks they are following the law due to an error in understanding the facts, their actions are not [Link]
key point is that the belief must be in good faith and based on a factual error, not a misunderstanding of the law.
Illustration:
A sees Z committing murder. A acting in good faith seizes Z in order to bring Z before the proper authorities. A has committed no
offence, though it may turn out that Z was acting in self-defense.
“R. vs. Tolson” (1889 23 QBD 168)
The appellant married in September 1880, and in December 1881, her husband went missing. She was informed that he had been on
a ship that was lost at sea. Six years later, believing her husband to be dead, she married another man. However, 11 months after the
second marriage, her husband reappeared, and she was charged with bigamy.
Held: The court ruled that she could use the defense of mistake, as it was reasonable under the circumstances to believe that her
husband was dead.
Accident (Section-18)
18
20 21
20:
21:
20 21
S. 20 S. 21
Section 22. Act of a person of unsound mind
Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at
the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind,
is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he
is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.
Section - 22
Section . 22
Section 23. Act of a person
incapable of judgment by reason of
intoxication caused against his will.
Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at
the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable
of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is
either wrong, or contrary to law; provided that the thing
which intoxicated him was administered to him without his
knowledge or against his will.
Section 24. Offence requiring a particular
intent or knowledge committed by one
who is intoxicated.
● A man enters into
In cases where an act done is not an offence intoxication
unless done with a particular knowledge or voluntarily,
intent, a person who does the act in a state of ● The same
intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if knowledge to such
he had the same knowledge as he would have a man as he would
had if he had not been intoxicated, unless the have had he not
thing which intoxicated him was administered been intoxicated
to him without his knowledge or against his
will.
Section. 23 & 24
Section. 23
Section. 23 & 24
Basdev VS State of Pepsu- :
● He was charged with the murder of young boy age 15 and 16 years
● Accused to attend a wedding in another village
● Accused asked the young boy, to step aside a little so that he might
occupy a convenient seat
● The boy was not to move
● Accused whipped out a pistol and shot the boy in the abdomen
● SC was rejecting the plea of accused at the time of committing
intoxicated.
Jethuram Sukura Nagbanshi VS State of Madhya Pradesh:
● If a man commits an offence
● When made intoxicated through fraud of another or
● Through coercion or ignorance practised by someone
● Not be said to have acted on his own accord and not
responsible for the consequences of his acts.
● Not liable for punishment.
JUSTIFIABLE ACTS
1. Judicial Acts (Sections-15 & 16) Privat Defences
1. Sec. 34 Things done in private
2. Necessity [Acts done to Avoid Defence of defence Defence of
Greater Harm] (Section-19) Body 2. Sec. 35 Right of private defence of
Body
body and of property
3. Consent (Section-25 to 29)
4. Acts done in Good-faith
1. Sec. 36 Right of private defence against act of a person of
(Section-30) unsound mind, etc.
1. Sec. 41 When right of
private defence of property
5. Communication made in 2. Sec. 37 Acts against which there is no right of private defence
extends to causing death.
3. Sec. 38 When right of private defence of body extends to
Good-faith (Section-31) causing death.
2. Sec. 42 When such right
extends to causing any harm
6. Act done under Compulsion or 4. Sec. 39 When such right extends to causing any harm other
other than death.
than death
Threat (Section-32) 3. Sec. 43 Commencement
5. Sec. 40 Commencement and continuance of right of private
7. Acts causing Slight Harm or and continuance of right of
defence of body
private defence of property.
Trifling Acts (Section-33) 6. Sec. 44 Right of private defence against deadly assault when
there is risk of harm to innocent person.
JUDICIAL ACTS (Sec 15 and sec 16 of BNS gives immunity from criminal liability to Judges and its staff)
Object of this Section 15 Sec 15 provides that: JUDICIAL ACTS
Nothing is an offence which is done by a Judge when acting
The object of protection to Judges is to judicially in the exercise of any power which is, or which in good
ensure the independence of the Judges faith he believes to be, given to him by law.
and to enable them to discharge their
Eg: Death sentence given by a Judge is protected under this
duties without any fear of the
section.
consequences.
The function of Judges creates a feeling Ingredients of sec 15:
of revenge in the mind of convicted 1. The act must be done by a Judge.
person. So the Judges are given immunity 2. Discharge his official duty - The Judge must be
from criminal liability. acting in exercise of power which is given to him by
law; or
3. Within the jurisdiction
4. Performed in good faith - The Judge must be acting
in exercise of power which in good faith he believes to
be given by law.
The Judges (Protection) Act, 1985
Section 3(1) of the act provides that no court shall initiate or proceed with any civil or criminal case against a Judge for any actions,
decisions, or statements made by them in the course of, or while appearing to carry out, their official or judicial responsibilities.
Acting Judicially:
An important element of sec 15 of BNS is that it should not only be an act of Judge, but it should be done by him in the course of
discharging his judicial powers.
“Ram Pratap Sharma vs. Dayanand” (AIR 1977 SC 809).
In this case, a Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court criticized government policy and openly attacked the government while
addressing members of the bar. The bar members wrote to the President about the Judge’s conduct. As a result, the High Court issued a
notice of criminal contempt against the bar members, who then issued an apology. When the matter reached the Supreme Court, it was
held that addressing political issues is not part of a Judge’s duties. Therefore, the Judge does not receive immunity under Section 77
of the IPC.
Meghraj vs Zakir Hussain 1915
● Even if he exceeds the jurisdiction
● Protection was geven in good faith under official transaction.
SEC. 16 - ACT DONE PURSUANT TO JUDGMENT OR ORDER OF COURT.
Sec 16 protects the members who
executes the orders of the court.
★ If such immunity is not given
Nothing which is done in pursuance of, or which than it would be impossible to
is warranted by the judgment or order of, a Court; execute or implement the
if done whilst such judgment or order remains in orders of the court.
force, is an offence, notwithstanding the Court ★ The protection extends even if
may have had no jurisdiction to pass such the court does not have
jurisdiction to issue such order,
judgment or order, provided the person doing the
provided that the person
act in good faith believes that the Court had such
executing the order believes in
jurisdiction. good faith that the court has
jurisdiction to issue such order.
❏ An officer is exempted from
criminal prosecution provided
the act is done in good faith
❏ He belief in the legalities of the
order.
Section. 19.
-19
Section. 19.
CONSENT (SECTION-25 TO 29)
Act done in good
Consent faith for benefit of
(Sec. 25 -29) a person without
Section - 30 consent
Section - 25 Section - 26 Section - 27 Section - 28 Section - 29
Act not intended to Act done in good Exclusion of
Act not intended
cause death, done faith for benefit of acts which are
and not known to Consent known to
by consent in good child or person of offences
be likely to cause be given under fear
faith for person's unsound mind, independently of
death or grievous or misconception
benefit. by, or by consent harm caused
hurt, done by
of guardian. (sections 25, 26
consent
and 27)
Mere pecuniary benefits is not benefit within meaning of Sec. 27 & 28
Section - 25 to 30
Consent
Section - 28
Section - 25 to 30
Consent
Section - 28 Section - 25
Section - 25 to 30
Consent
Section - 28 Section - 25 Section - 26
Section - 25 to 30
Consent
Section - 28 Section - 25 Section - 26 Section - 27
Section - 25 to 30
Consent
Section - 28 Section - 25 Section - 26 Section - 27 Section - 29
Sec. 25, 26 & 29
Sec. 25, 26 & 29
-30
for benefit of a person without consent
30
-31
-32
-33
Right of Private
Defence (RPD) Right of Private
No RPD S. 37
Sec. 34 to 44 Defence (S. 34)
RPD - Against RPD - of Body & RPD - Against Insane,
Innocent Person S.44 Property S. 35 Intoxicated, Youth S. 36
RPD of Body RPD of Property
S. 35(a) S. 35(b)
When RPD extended When RPD extended When RPD extended When RPD
to Death S. 38 to other than Death to other than Death extended to other
S. 39 S. 41 than Death S. 42
Commencement
When RPD extended
Continuation & End
to other than Death
of RPD of Body
S. 43
S. 40
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
Right of private defence against the
Section- 37 act of a person of unsound mind
etc..
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39 ● An act not in offences by reason
Defence of
Section- 40
➔ Youth
Section- 41 ➔ Want of maturity of
understanding
Section- 42 ➔ Unsound mind
➔ Intoxication
Section- 43
➔ Reason of any misconception
Section- 44
Section- 34 Acts against which there is no right of private defence
❖ There is no right of private defence
Section- 35 ➢ Act does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death
➢ Grievous hurt
Section- 36 ➢ Attempted to be done by a public servant acting good
faith under color of his office
Section- 37
➢ If there is time to have recourse to the protection of the
public authority
❖ In no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it
Section- 38
is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence.
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35 BNS
Section- 36
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of 38 of BNS
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44
Section- 34
Section- 35
Section- 36
- 41 of BNS
Section- 37
Section- 38
Right of
Private Section- 39
Defence
Section- 40
Section- 41
Section- 42
Section- 43
Section- 44