Section 323-326 IPC vs Section 115-118 BNS — Hurt and Grievous Hurt (IPC 319-326)

In India, Sections 114 to 118 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) replaced the hurt and grievous hurt provisions, Sections 319 to 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), on 1 July 2024. The biggest change: grievous hurt by prolonged pain now needs fifteen days, not twenty (Section 116(h)).

At a glance

The CrPC First Schedule classified Sections 323 to 326 IPC the same way, except that Section 324 was bailable; Section 118(1) is now non-bailable.

Neighbours: acid attack (Sections 326A and 326B IPC) is now Section 124 BNS, which adds causing "a permanent vegetative state"; hurt on grave and sudden provocation (Sections 334 and 335 IPC) is now Section 122 BNS, to which the "except" clauses in Sections 115(2), 117(2) and 118 point.

What changed

• Identical — Sections 114 and 115(1) (IPC 319 and 321): the definitions of hurt and of voluntarily causing hurt are word for word the same.
• Modified — Section 115(2) (IPC 323): fine "which may extend to one thousand rupees" becomes "ten thousand rupees". The cross-reference "except in the case provided for by section 334" becomes "sub-section (1) of section 122". Imprisonment stays at up to one year.
• Modified — Section 116 (IPC 320): the clauses are relettered (a) to (h) instead of "First" to "Eighthly", and "namely" is added. In clause (h), "during the space of twenty days" becomes "during the space of fifteen days". The other seven kinds of grievous hurt are unchanged.
• Minor edit — Section 117(1) (IPC 322): same definition and Explanation. The Illustration now speaks of severe bodily pain "for the space of fifteen days" instead of twenty, matching Section 116(h).
• Minor edit — Section 117(2) (IPC 325): same punishment (up to seven years and fine); the cross-reference to Section 335 becomes "sub-section (2) of section 122".
• New — Section 117(3): grievous hurt that causes "permanent disability or ... persistent vegetative state" is punished with rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years, which may extend to imprisonment for life, "which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life".
• New — Section 117(4): when "a group of five or more persons acting in concert" causes grievous hurt on the ground of race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language, personal belief "or any other similar ground", each member is guilty of causing grievous hurt, punishable with up to seven years and fine.
• Modified — Section 118(1) (IPC 324): the list of weapons and means is unchanged except for a comma added after "explosive substance". Section 324 said "or with fine, or with both"; Section 118(1) caps the fine at "twenty thousand rupees".
• Modified — Section 118(2) (IPC 326): instead of repeating the list, it refers to "any means referred to in sub-section (1)". The term alternative becomes "not less than one year but which may extend to ten years"; imprisonment for life and fine are unchanged. The two IPC sections now share one marginal heading: "Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means".

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 320 IPC, Eighthly (repealed from 1 July 2024):

Eighthly.—Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

Extract, Section 116(h) BNS:

(h) Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of fifteen days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

Extract, Section 118(2) BNS:

(2) Whoever, except in the case provided for by sub-section (2) of section 122, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by any means referred to in sub–section (1), shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

How it works — the ingredients

Hurt (Section 114) is "bodily pain, disease or infirmity". Voluntarily causing hurt (Section 115(1)) adds the mental element: the act is done with the intention of causing hurt to any person, or with the knowledge that it is likely to do so, and hurt is in fact caused.

Grievous hurt (Section 116) is a closed list. The word "only" in "The following kinds of hurt only are designated as 'grievous'" means a hurt that fits none of clauses (a) to (h) is simple hurt, however painful. Clause (h) has three alternatives: the hurt endangers life; or it keeps the sufferer in severe bodily pain for fifteen days; or it leaves the sufferer unable to follow ordinary pursuits for fifteen days.

Voluntarily causing grievous hurt (Section 117(1)) needs both limbs:

1. the hurt actually caused is grievous; and
2. the accused intended, or knew himself likely, to cause grievous hurt.

The Explanation adds that the kinds need not match. The Illustration: A intends, or knows it is likely, to disfigure Z's face permanently; the blow does not disfigure Z but leaves Z in severe bodily pain for fifteen days; A has voluntarily caused grievous hurt.

Dangerous weapons or means (Section 118) aggravate the offence where hurt or grievous hurt is caused by an instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting; any instrument likely to cause death when used as a weapon of offence; fire or any heated substance; poison or any corrosive substance; any explosive substance; any substance deleterious to inhale, swallow or receive into the blood; or any animal.

The new aggravated forms — Section 117(3) begins "Whoever commits an offence under sub-section (1)", so on a reading of the text voluntarily causing grievous hurt must be established first. Section 117(4) turns on a group of five or more "acting in concert" and a discriminatory ground; its structure resembles the group-murder offence in Section 103(2) BNS.

What this means in practice

For the injured person

• Simple hurt (115(2)) is non-cognizable. Under Section 174(1) BNSS the officer in charge records the substance of the information and refers the informant to the Magistrate; under Section 174(2) the police cannot investigate without a Magistrate's order. Under Section 174(4), if the same case also discloses a cognizable offence, for example Section 118(1), the whole case is treated as cognizable.
• For clause (h), a medical record showing how long the pain or incapacity lasted is the key document; the threshold is now fifteen days.
• Under Section 359(1) BNSS the person hurt may compound simple hurt (115(2)) and hurt or grievous hurt on provocation (122(1) and (2)). Grievous hurt under Section 117(2) may be compounded only with the court's permission (Section 359(2)). Section 320 CrPC treated Sections 323, 334 and 335 IPC, and Section 325 IPC, the same way.

For the accused and defence advocate

• Section 118(1) is now non-bailable. Where Section 324 IPC would have been bailable as of right, bail on a Section 118(1) charge is a matter for the court.
• Whether an object is a dangerous weapon is a question of fact (see Prabhu below); it decides whether the charge is Section 117(2) (bailable, any Magistrate) or Section 118(2) (non-bailable, Magistrate of the first class).
• Section 479(1) BNSS (release after detention for one-half of the maximum term, or one-third for a first-time offender) does not apply where life imprisonment is one of the punishments, which excludes Sections 117(3) and 118(2).

For the investigating officer and prosecutor

• The charge should name the clause of Section 116 relied on. For clause (h), the record should show the number of days of severe pain or incapacity; Prabhu (para 11) requires the clause relied on to be strictly proved, and in Omanakuttan (para 10.1) the Court drew the inference of more than twenty days of severe pain from extensive burns, more than 50 days in hospital and the victim's own evidence (see both below).
• Section 117(4) requires evidence of the group, of concerted action and of the discriminatory ground; on a reading of the text, without the ground the charge falls back to Section 117(2), with joint liability resting on the general provisions.

Judgments that still matter

Niranjan Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2007] 7 S.C.R. 1017 (2007 INSC 696) — 14 June 2007. Arijit Pasayat and B.P. Singh JJ. upheld convictions under Sections 392 and 397 IPC (robbery, with an attempt to cause grievous hurt), where a knife blow was struck on the chest just below the nipple. Setting out the eighth clause of Section 320 IPC, the Court said (para 9): "The term endangers life is much stronger than the expression dangerous to life." The words "endangers life" are repeated in Section 116(h) BNS, so, on a reading of the text, this remains relevant to the new clause.

Prabhu v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2008] 16 S.C.R. 1095 — 3 December 2008. Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma JJ. upheld a conviction under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC for a lathi assault, while reducing the sentence to five years. The Court held that before a conviction for grievous hurt, "one of the injuries defined in Section 320 must be strictly proved, and the eighth clause is no exception" to strict construction of penal statutes (para 11). It held that what is a "dangerous weapon" "would depend upon the facts of each case and no generalization can be made" (para 12), and listed three ingredients of Section 326: voluntarily causing hurt, the hurt being grievous, and dangerous weapons or means (para 13). These are the ingredients of Section 118(2) BNS.

Omanakuttan v. State of Kerala, [2019] 7 S.C.R. 482 — 9 May 2019. Abhay Manohar Sapre and Dinesh Maheshwari JJ. upheld a conviction under Section 326 IPC for pouring acid on a neighbour in 1997. The Court held that "The acid is undoubtedly a corrosive substance within the meaning of Section 326 IPC" and that, given extensive burns and more than 50 days in hospital, it was unrealistic to suppose the victim was not in severe bodily pain for more than 20 days; the case fell under "Sixthly" and "Eighthly" of Section 320 (para 10.1). It noted that Sections 326A and 326B IPC, inserted in 2013, carry higher minimums for acid attacks (para 11); that offence is now Section 124 BNS, while "corrosive substance" stays in Section 118(1).

Ishwar Chand Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2026 INSC 587 — 29 May 2026. B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan JJ. quashed a complaint that included a charge under Section 115 BNS. The Court said the prosecution must show prima facie that "bodily pain, disease or infirmity was caused". It held that "production of an injury report is not a sine qua non for proving an offence under Section 115 of BNS", but a trial "cannot be allowed to proceed merely on a bald statement of allegation" (para 7.8). This is a Supreme Court judgment applying Section 115 BNS directly.

Which law applies to your case

Section 358(2) BNS keeps alive any penalty or punishment incurred under the IPC and allows proceedings to be instituted, continued or enforced "as if that Code had not been repealed"; on a reading of that provision, hurt caused before 1 July 2024 is charged under Sections 319 to 326 IPC. Proceedings pending on that date continue under the CrPC (Section 531(2)(a) BNSS). Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars a penalty greater than the law in force when the offence was committed. On a reading of that Article, the one-year minimum in Section 118(2) and the higher fine in Section 115(2) cannot be applied to earlier conduct. A hurt caused before 1 July 2024 that kept the sufferer in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow ordinary pursuits, for fifteen to nineteen days did not meet the twenty-day limb of the eighth clause of Section 320 IPC. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNS equivalent of Sections 323, 324, 325 and 326 IPC? Section 323 IPC is now Section 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 324 is Section 118(1); Section 325 is Section 117(2); and Section 326 is Section 118(2). The definitions in Sections 319 to 322 IPC are now Sections 114, 115(1), 116 and 117(1) BNS.

What counts as grievous hurt under the BNS? Section 116 BNS lists eight kinds: emasculation; permanent loss of sight of either eye or hearing of either ear; loss of any member or joint; destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of a member or joint; permanent disfiguration of the head or face; fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth; and any hurt that endangers life or causes severe bodily pain, or inability to follow ordinary pursuits, for fifteen days. Section 320 IPC required twenty days for that last category.

Is Section 118(1) BNS bailable? No. The First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 lists Section 118(1) BNS, voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means, as cognizable and non-bailable, triable by any Magistrate. The CrPC First Schedule listed Section 324 IPC as cognizable but bailable, so bail is no longer available as of right for this offence.

Can a hurt case be settled by compromise? Partly. Under Section 359(1) BNSS the person hurt may compound simple hurt under Section 115(2) BNS without court permission. Under Section 359(2), grievous hurt under Section 117(2) can be compounded only with the permission of the court. Sections 117(3), 117(4), 118(1) and 118(2) are not in either table, and Section 359(9) bars compounding except as the section provides.

What are the new offences in Section 117(3) and 117(4) BNS? Section 117(3) punishes grievous hurt that leaves the victim in permanent disability or a persistent vegetative state with rigorous imprisonment of at least ten years, extendable to imprisonment for the remainder of natural life. Section 117(4) makes each member of a group of five or more persons acting in concert guilty of grievous hurt caused on grounds such as race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language or personal belief, punishable with up to seven years and fine. Neither had an IPC equivalent.

Is an injury report necessary to prosecute hurt under Section 115 BNS? Not always. In Ishwar Chand Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2026 INSC 587, para 7.8), the Supreme Court said an injury report is not a sine qua non for an offence under Section 115 BNS, but the prosecution must show by other material that bodily pain, disease or infirmity was caused. It quashed the proceedings because the complaint made only a bald allegation of hurt.

Which law applies to a hurt case from before 1 July 2024? Section 358(2) BNS saves penalties incurred under the IPC and lets proceedings continue as if the IPC had not been repealed, so on a reading of that text an assault committed before 1 July 2024 is charged under Sections 319 to 326 IPC. On a reading of Article 20(1) of the Constitution, the new fifteen-day threshold in Section 116(h) and the new minimum in Section 118(2) cannot operate to the accused's detriment for earlier conduct.

Related

• A fight causing hurt or grievous hurt — BNS 115-117 vs IPC 319-325
• Mob lynching — BNS 103(2)
• Robbery and dacoity: IPC 392-395 vs BNS
• Compromise in a criminal case — compounding under BNSS 359
• Bail provisions — old vs new
• IPC to BNS — master table
• Sections 326A and 326B IPC vs Section 124 BNS — Acid Attack

Sources

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 114 to 118, 122, 124 and 358.
• Indian Penal Code, 1860 (India Code text): Sections 319 to 326B, 334 and 335, with footnotes.
• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 174, 359, 479 and 531, and the First Schedule entries for Sections 115(2) to 118(2) and 124 BNS.
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 320 and the First Schedule entries for Sections 323 to 326 IPC.
• Constitution of India: Article 20(1).
• Judgments read in full text: Niranjan Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2007_7_1017_1021_EN.md); Prabhu v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2008_16_1095_1102_EN.md); Omanakuttan v. State of Kerala (2019_7_482_489_EN.md); Ishwar Chand Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Diary_62571-2025_Judgment.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.