Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Section 105 of BNS and Accident Death - Section 105 pertains to punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, which involves causing death with knowledge or intention. Several sources highlight that whether an accident qualifies under Section 105 depends on the presence of intent or knowledge of causing death. In many cases, courts have emphasized that accidents caused by negligence without intent or knowledge do not automatically fall under Section 105; instead, they are often considered under Section 106 (causing death by negligence) or similar provisions ["Perni Nani @ Venkateswara Rao, S/o P.Krishna Murth vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"]["Sameer Khan vs State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"]["VISHU KAPOOR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB - Punjab and Haryana"].
Intent and Knowledge Requirement - The applicability of Section 105 requires proof of intent or at least knowledge that the act could cause death. Courts have observed that mere negligence or rash driving without intent does not suffice for Section 105. For example, in one case, it was argued that the driver had no intention or knowledge that his driving would cause death, hence Section 105 was not applicable ["Mihir Rajesh Shah vs State of Maharashtra - Bombay"]["MOHAMMED NIZAM vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"].
Legal Proceedings and Court Views - Courts often scrutinize whether the accused had the requisite intent or knowledge before invoking Section 105. Many judgments suggest that Section 105 is invoked when there is clear evidence of culpable mental state, otherwise, the case may be framed under negligence-related sections like Section 106 ["JETHIN KRISHNA vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"]["MOHAMMAD JUNAID vs STATE BY - Karnataka"].
Alteration of Legal Sections - There are instances where law enforcement altered the section from Section 106 to Section 105 based on statements, but courts tend to emphasize the importance of establishing intent or knowledge before framing charges under Section 105 ["Perni Nani @ Venkateswara Rao, S/o P.Krishna Murth vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"].
Analysis and Conclusion:Based on the sources, accident deaths can be framed under Section 105 of BNS only if there is evidence of culpable mental state, such as intent or knowledge that the act could cause death. Merely causing death due to negligence, rashness, or without such mental element generally leads to framing charges under Section 106 or other negligence provisions. Courts consistently stress that Section 105 is not applicable in pure accident cases where no intent or knowledge is established. Therefore, Accident Deaths are not automatically covered under Section 105 unless the prosecution proves culpable mental state ["Sameer Khan vs State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"]["VISHU KAPOOR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB - Punjab and Haryana"].
References:- Perni Nani @ Venkateswara Rao, S/o P.Krishna Murth vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh- Sameer Khan vs State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh- Chetan Gulabrao Thorat vs State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Chikhli, District Buldhana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1845- VISHU KAPOOR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB - Punjab and Haryana- MOHAMMED NIZAM vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala- MOHAMMAD JUNAID vs STATE BY - Karnataka- JETHIN KRISHNA vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala
In the aftermath of a tragic incident resulting in death, questions often arise about criminal liability. Imagine a scenario where a mishap leads to someone's demise— was it murder, culpable homicide, or merely an accident? A critical query for those navigating India's new criminal laws is: Whether Accident Death can be Framed under Section 105 of BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023). This post delves into the legal nuances, drawing from statutory provisions and judicial interpretations to clarify when such deaths may qualify under exceptions to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Section 105 of the BNS addresses Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It replaces provisions akin to Section 304 of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code. Crucially, it incorporates a presumption mechanism for exceptions, such as accidental deaths. The section states that when an accused claims an exception—like the death being accidental—the burden is on him to prove the existence of circumstances bringing the case within that exception. The court shall presume the absence of such circumstances unless proven otherwise on a balance (or preponderance) of probabilities14171~S.105Tushar Nath S/o. Sri Prafulla Nath vs State Of Assam - 2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 737.
This shifts the onus temporarily to the accused, but it's not as stringent as the prosecution's beyond reasonable doubt standard K. M. Nanavati VS State Of Maharashtra - 1961 0 Supreme(SC) 374.
Yes, generally, accident death can be considered within the scope of the exception under Section 105 of the BNS, provided the accused establishes that the death resulted from an unintentional act or circumstances not amounting to culpable homicide or murder Rishi Kesh Singh VS The State - 1968 0 Supreme(All) 133.
In practice, evidence like eyewitness accounts, forensic reports, or circumstances (e.g., accidental discharge of a weapon) can demonstrate unintentionality K. M. Nanavati VS State Of Maharashtra - 1961 0 Supreme(SC) 374.
Courts have consistently held that Section 105 requires proof of intent or knowledge for culpable homicide. Without it, accidents may qualify under exceptions.
Another instance involved quashing an FIR under Section 105, where the court refused premature adjudication but upheld investigation rights, noting at best it might fall under Section 106(1) BNS (causing death by negligence) TAUSHIFAHEMAD TAIMURBHAI GOHIL vs STATE OF GUJARAT - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 7872.
Bail was granted in a case lacking motive or premeditation for Section 105 charges, where the deceased was found unconscious without visible injuries, highlighting absence of serious opposition Ajayaveer vs State Through Sho P S Bawana - 2025 Supreme(Del) 92.
For accident deaths, courts scrutinize the nexus between the act and death. In compensation claims under Motor Vehicles Act, tribunals require proving direct link; pre-existing conditions weakening nexus reduced awards Branch Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. VS Prafulla U Shetty - 2024 Supreme(Kar) 499. Similarly, under Workmen's Compensation Act, no nexus meant no liability despite workplace fall due to assault New India Assurance Company Limited, rep. , by its Divisional Manager VS Noorjahan Begum - 2011 Supreme(AP) 237.
In railway untoward incidents, strict liability applies if the deceased was a valid passenger, awarding compensation without fault proof Ram Sakal Rai VS Union of India - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 2391. These civil analogies underscore criminal courts' focus on intent under BNS.
| Aspect | Details ||--------|---------|| Applicability | Yes, if unintentional and proven on balance of probabilities 14171~S.105. || Burden | On accused, rebuttable presumption Tushar Nath S/o. Sri Prafulla Nath vs State Of Assam - 2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 737. || Evidence | Crucial for nexus and lack of intent Rishi Kesh Singh VS The State - 1968 0 Supreme(All) 133. || Outcomes | Bail/quashing possible without motive/intent MANOJKUMAR S vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34515. |
Accident deaths may be framed under Section 105 BNS exceptions if the accused demonstrates unintentional circumstances on preponderance of probabilities, rebutting the presumption of culpability 14171~S.105Tushar Nath S/o. Sri Prafulla Nath vs State Of Assam - 2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 737Rishi Kesh Singh VS The State - 1968 0 Supreme(All) 133. Judicial trends favor lighter burdens and bail in weak intent cases, but robust evidence remains pivotal. Stay informed on evolving BNS interpretations, and seek professional counsel for case-specific guidance.
References:1. Hansura Bai VS State of Madhya Pradesh - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 850 - Culpable homicide framework.2. 14171~S.105 - Section 105 text.3. Tushar Nath S/o. Sri Prafulla Nath vs State Of Assam - 2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 737 - Proof on probabilities.4. Rishi Kesh Singh VS The State - 1968 0 Supreme(All) 133 - Scope and burden.5. K. M. Nanavati VS State Of Maharashtra - 1961 0 Supreme(SC) 374 - Supreme Court on burden.6. Other cases: MANOJKUMAR S vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34515, TAUSHIFAHEMAD TAIMURBHAI GOHIL vs STATE OF GUJARAT - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 7872, Ajayaveer vs State Through Sho P S Bawana - 2025 Supreme(Del) 92, Branch Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. VS Prafulla U Shetty - 2024 Supreme(Kar) 499, Ram Sakal Rai VS Union of India - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 2391, New India Assurance Company Limited, rep. , by its Divisional Manager VS Noorjahan Begum - 2011 Supreme(AP) 237, SHIV PRAKASH TIWARI VS STATE OF U. P. - 2011 Supreme(All) 320.
#BNSSection105, #AccidentDeathLaw, #CulpableHomicide
BNS and subsequently, basing on the statement of one Durga Rao, the Section of law was altered from Section 106 (1) BNS to Section 105 read with 49 Section 105 BNS deals with punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. ... On the strength of the said statement, police altered the Section of law from Section 106 (1) BNS to Section 105#HL_E....
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence under Section 105 of the BNS is baseless as the applicant had no intention to cause the injury to the deceased or his parents or knowledge that his driving would cause death of deceased. ... under Sections 125(A) & 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. ... due to negligence on the part of the rider of the alleged motorcycle, therefore, offence would be under Section 106 of the BNS instead....
Present application is preferred by the applicant for grant of bail in connection with crime Section 105 of B.N.S. is added as per Court’s No.244/2025 registered under Sections 105, 281, order dated 16.05.2025 punishable under Sections 105, 281 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount. ... On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the investigation papers, it reveals that the accident t....
The issue regarding applicability of Section 105 of the BNS in the present case will be decided during the course of the trial. ... He was unable to control the car which resulted in the death of Kaveri, First Informant’s wife. As Mr. Mundargi would want the Court to observe inapplicability of Section 105 Part-I of the BNS, this is not the stage to decide the said aspect. ... He further submitted that to invoke Section 105 Part-I of....
Learned Senior counsel contends it is unfortunate that the accident was caused resulting in complainant’s son’s death, but there was no intention on the petitioner’s part to do so. ... The petitioner’s culpability for the offence under Section 105 BNS is a matter of trial which is still to commence. He has no criminal antecedents, nor is there any apprehension of his tampering with the evidence or influencing the witnesses. His further incarceration is therefore not justified. ... Therefore, the offence....
Initially, the crime was registered under Section s 281 and 106 of BNS . However, later on, Section 106 of BNS was deleted and Section 105 of BNS was incorporated. Going by the records, it appears that it is a simple case of accident. At present, there is nothing to suggest that there was an intention or knowledge on the part of the applicant that his act would result in the death of the deceased. ... The offences alleged are punish....
(Paras 1, 18) ... ... (B) Culpable homicide – The court examined the intent and knowledge required under Section 105 of the Bharatiya ... On a literal understanding of the Section 105 of the BNS, it is evident that the provision is of two parts. ... In the context of the case on hand, it is apposite to extract Section 105 of the BNS, which reads as follows: 105. Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. ... The alle....
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 [for short, ‘ BNS ’]. Initially the crime was registered under Section 194 of the Section 105 of BNS that too, against the petitioner. ... Petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No.474/2025 of Meppadi Police Station, Wayanad District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 105 r/w Section 3(5) of the a href="./..
Accused in Crime No.136/2024 registered by Jeevan Bhima Nagar (Indiranagar) Traffic Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 281, 125(b) and 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 read with Section 185 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is before this Court ... Per contra, learned HCGP submits that petitioner was riding his bike after consuming alcohol and it is in this background, offences punishable under Section 105 of the BNS....
This petition seeks to quash FIR No. 11199028250540 of 2025 under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, claiming no prima ... Sanhita, 2023, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, as no prima facie offence under Section 105 of BNS is disclosed against the present applicant. ... YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to Hold that at the highest, the ingredients of Section 106 (1) of BNS (equivalent to Section 304A IPC – causing #HL_ST....
2. The prosecution case is as follows. On 06.08. 2024, on receipt of DD No. 86A regarding an unconscious man without any visible injuries found near factory no. 250, Sector-1, Bawana, the investigating officer from PS Bawana proceeded to the spot, where he met the first informant Rajesh, who informed that the unconscious man lying there was Kamal, working as a truck driver with him for the past three years. When Kamal did not respond, Rajesh called the emergency services. Bail granted due to lack of serious opposition and absence of motive. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case ....
(ii) What is the effect of dismissal of MVC.No.611/2008 and Mis. Case No.4/2010 on the present claim petition? (iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation as a dependant? 8. The material on record such as prosecution papers and medical records goes to show that the deceased was met with an accident on 30.04.2008 at 8.00 a.m. being a pedestrian hit by the lorry in question, in the accident he has sustained the injuries over right orbital region, both sides of face and head. He was admitted to the various hospitals for treatment referred supra, ultimately he died on 02.12.2008. Th....
(1) Whether at the time of accident deceased was valid passenger in railway? (3) Whether the applicant is sole surviving legal representative of the deceased? (2) Whether deceased has died in such accident, which is an untoward incident under Section 123(C)(2)?
It has also held that the accident arising within and in the course of employment and the claimant should prove the nexus between the death and the accident, and if they failed to prove the same, employer is not liable to pay any compensation. In the present case on hand, it has to be seen whether there is any nexus between the accident and the death. The facts noted in the aforesaid decision are squarely applicable to the present case on hand. Admittedly the deceased died due to head injury when he was fallen on the ground due to violent attack by the opposite driver.
5. Learned AGA per contra submitted that the impugned order is an interlocutory order, as the charge can be amended at any stage and therefore, revision is barred under Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. It was an unlawful assembly and in fact the revisionists have no grouse against framing of charges under all other offences but for 302 IPC. Autopsy report of the deceased indicates at least one injuries sufficient to cause death and therefore, charge under Section 302 IPC has been rightly framed. It lies within the realm of the trail Judge to alter the charge suitably at any subsequen....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
