AI Overview...

Punishment for Voluntary Hurt under Section 118 of BNS - The section deals with causing hurt using dangerous weapons or instruments. The punishment is imprisonment up to three years, a fine up to 20,000 rupees, or both ["Nenavath Deva vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]. Similarly, when the section was altered to 118(2) after receipt of medical evidence, the punishment remained the same, with the maximum imprisonment of three years and fine ["Nenavath Deva vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"], ["Sri Buchala Danda vs The State of telangana - Telangana"].
Nature of Offense and Severity - Offenses under Section 118(1) are considered serious when involving weapons or dangerous instruments likely to cause death or grievous hurt, especially if injuries are severe or involve weapons like stabbing or cutting instruments ["Nenavath Deva vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"], ["Sri Buchala Danda vs The State of telangana - Telangana"]. The severity can extend to heinous crimes if injuries are grievous or involve multiple injuries, and in some cases, the maximum punishment can be life imprisonment, particularly under 118(2) ["BASAVARAJ S/O SHIVANAND TIRLAPUR v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka"].
Legal Proceedings and Case Handling - Cases involving Section 118(1) are non-bailable in certain circumstances, especially when injuries are serious, or weapons are used. Courts often consider the nature of injuries, evidence, and whether the accused's custodial interrogation is necessary. For example, in some cases, courts have refused anticipatory bail due to the severity of injuries or ongoing investigation ["JANSAMMA VAIPPISSERIL vs DISTRICT COLLECTOR - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10477"], ["JOHN FREDERICK vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"], ["VISHNU V AGED 28 YEARS S/O VIKRAMAN PILLAI vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"].
Procedural Guidelines and Bail Considerations - The Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar emphasize following proper procedures, especially in cases involving serious injuries or weapons ["Nenavath Deva vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]. Courts have also imposed conditions such as deposit of fines or sureties to grant bail, especially when the offense involves non-bailable sections like 118(1) ["SUNIL KUMAR H vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"], ["G RAJESH vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - Andhra Pradesh"].
Case Resolution and Remedies - Many cases suggest that if injuries are simple and both parties agree, proceedings can be quashed or FIRs compounded, especially when the injuries are minor and the parties seek reconciliation ["VINIL vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"], ["INDPOL00000128511"]. However, in cases with serious injuries or heinous intent, custodial interrogation and strict legal procedures are maintained.

Analysis and Conclusion -Section 118 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) criminalizes causing hurt with dangerous weapons, with punishments up to three years imprisonment and fines. The severity of punishment depends on the nature of injuries and use of weapons. While minor injuries may lead to bail with conditions, serious injuries or use of weapons can result in non-bailable charges and custodial detention. Proper investigation, adherence to legal guidelines, and consideration of the injury severity are crucial for case resolution. Cases involving grievous hurt or weapons are inherently serious, and courts tend to prioritize thorough investigation and procedural compliance before granting relief ["Nenavath Deva vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"], ["Sri Buchala Danda vs The State of telangana - Telangana"], ["JANSAMMA VAIPPISSERIL vs DISTRICT COLLECTOR - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10477"].

Understanding Voluntary Hurt Under Section 118: Punishment and Case Resolution

In the realm of Indian criminal law, incidents of physical harm often lead to questions like: Voluntary Hurt Section 118 what Would be Punishment and how the Case can be Solved? Whether you're a victim seeking justice, an accused facing charges, or simply curious about your rights, grasping the nuances of Section 118 is crucial. This provision, now primarily under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023—which replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC)—addresses voluntarily causing hurt, with punishments scaling based on severity. This blog breaks it down step-by-step, drawing from legal precedents and principles to offer clarity. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.

What Constitutes Voluntary Hurt Under Section 118?

Section 118 of the BNS (corresponding to IPC Sections 323, 324, and related provisions) defines voluntarily causing hurt as an intentional act leading to bodily pain, disease, or infirmity. As per the legal framework, Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished... This emphasizes the voluntary element—intention or knowledge that the act will cause hurt. Fatema Khatun VS State Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 394

Hurt is classified as:- Simple Hurt (Section 319 IPC/BNS equivalent): Minor injuries like pain or bruises.- Grievous Hurt (Section 320 IPC/BNS 117): Severe, including fractures, emasculation, or injuries causing permanent disability.

Section 118(1) BNS specifically covers hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means, akin to old IPC 324. For instance, Section 118(1) of B.N.S., which corresponds to Section 324 of the Penal Code... XXXXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1909

Punishment for Offences Under Section 118

Punishments vary by severity, ensuring proportionality:- Simple Voluntary Hurt (BNS 115/ old IPC 323): Imprisonment up to 1 year, fine up to ₹1,000, or both. Section 323 IPC prescribes punishment for causing voluntary hurt. Fatema Khatun VS State Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 394- Hurt by Dangerous Weapons (BNS 118(1)/IPC 324): Up to 3 years imprisonment and/or fine.- Grievous Hurt by Dangerous Weapons (BNS 118(2)/IPC 326): Rigorous imprisonment from 1 year to life, plus fine. Section 118(2) of the BNS for which the punishment provided is for imprisonment of life, or... not less than one year but which may extend upto ten years... Bathula Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkaiah VS State Of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , through the Station House Officer, Inkollu Police Station - 2024 Supreme(AP) 357

Courts consider factors like intent, weapon used, and injury extent during sentencing. In serious cases, like assaults with sticks causing fractures, bail is often denied: Anticipatory bail denied due to serious nature of injuries and specific overt acts... BATHULA SRINIVASA RAO vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16181

How Can a Voluntary Hurt Case Be Resolved?

Resolving such cases follows a structured judicial process:1. FIR Registration: Victim reports to police, triggering investigation.2. Evidence Collection: Medical reports, eyewitnesses, CCTV, or weapons prove the act. Establishing the act of causing hurt: Evidence such as medical reports, eyewitness testimonies...3. Prosecution's Burden: Prove voluntariness and intent. The prosecution must demonstrate that the hurt was caused intentionally or voluntarily.4. Trial Proceedings: Accused defends; possibilities include acquittal, conviction, plea bargaining (for minor cases), or compromise (non-compoundable for grievous hurt).5. Sentencing: Court applies BNS/IPC limits, factoring circumstances. The case can be settled or disposed of through a judicial order based on evidence, plea, and applicable law.

For minor hurts, compromises may suffice, but grievous cases demand full trials. Delays in FIR (e.g., due to medical treatment) are often justified. BATHULA SRINIVASA RAO vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16181

Bail Considerations in Section 118 Cases

Anticipatory or regular bail depends on gravity:- Denied in Serious Cases: The court found that the delay in lodging the FIR was justified... and the allegations... were substantiated... Petitions dismissed. BATHULA SRINIVASA RAO vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16181- Custodial Interrogation Needed: For weapon recovery, as in offence punishable under Section 118(2) BNS has been added, and therefore, custodial interrogation... essential. RAJESH vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12922

Insights from Recent Case Laws

Judicial interpretations refine application:- Corporal Punishment Context: Teachers' actions aren't automatically criminalized. Corporal punishment by teachers is not criminalized under the Juvenile Justice Act... Section 75 of the J.J. Act does not deal with any corporal punishment... XXXXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1909 XXXXXXXXXX vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 38284. Courts quash FIRs absent explicit laws, stressing strict penal interpretation.- Unlawful Assembly & Hurt: In rioting cases, convictions under related sections (e.g., 323 IPC) lead to 2-7 years imprisonment. Fatema Khatun VS State Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 394- Drunken Driving Links: Rash acts causing hurt invoke similar principles, urging stricter enforcement. Man Vizhi VS Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai - 2014 Supreme(Mad) 4292

Principles from appeals emphasize evidence: The statement of the victim duly corroborated... leads to... guilty of causing voluntary hurt. Ayoub Dedar VS State Of J. &K. - 2009 Supreme(J&K) 561 And cross-cases need simultaneous trials for fairness. Marani Nama VS Dilip Dutta - 2015 Supreme(Tri) 37

General guidance from precedents: The general principles regarding the offence of grievous hurt and the importance of social fabric and compromise in exceptional cases. H. N. Pandakumar VS State of Karnataka - 2025 1 Supreme 321 The principles of criminal appeal, evidence, and how offences are proved and settled in courts... ROHITBHAI JIVANLAL PATEL VS STATE OF GUJARAT - 2019 3 Supreme 662

Practical Recommendations

For Victims: Document everything—photos, medicals, witnesses. Seek timely FIR.
For Accused: Gather alibi evidence; apply for bail early if minor. Consider legal aid.
Seek Compromise: Viable for simple hurt via mediation.
Legal Representation: Essential for arguing intent or defenses like self-defense (IPC 96-106/BNS equivalents).

Collect and present clear evidence demonstrating the act of causing hurt and its voluntary nature. If the hurt is minor, seek a plea for leniency or a compromise.

Key Takeaways

Section 118 punishes voluntary hurt from fines/1 year (simple) to life (grievous with weapons).
Resolution hinges on evidence, trial, and judicial discretion—bail tougher in serious cases.
Evolving with BNS, but core IPC principles persist; corporal punishment nuances apply in schools.

Stay informed, act promptly, and prioritize peaceful resolutions where possible. For personalized guidance, contact a legal expert. Legal landscapes evolve—recent BNS shifts demand updated awareness.

References: Insights drawn from H. N. Pandakumar VS State of Karnataka - 2025 1 Supreme 321 ROHITBHAI JIVANLAL PATEL VS STATE OF GUJARAT - 2019 3 Supreme 662 XXXXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1909 XXXXXXXXXX vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 38284 BATHULA SRINIVASA RAO vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16181 Bathula Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkaiah VS State Of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , through the Station House Officer, Inkollu Police Station - 2024 Supreme(AP) 357 RAJESH vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12922 Fatema Khatun VS State Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 394 Marani Nama VS Dilip Dutta - 2015 Supreme(Tri) 37 Man Vizhi VS Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai - 2014 Supreme(Mad) 4292 Ayoub Dedar VS State Of J. &K. - 2009 Supreme(J&K) 561.

#Section118 #VoluntaryHurt #LegalGuide

Sri Buchala Danda vs The State of telangana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 54431

Section 118(1) of BNS reads as follows: “Section 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 deals with voluntarily causing hurt by means of dangerous weapons or instruments. ... Initially case was registered under Section 118(1) of BNS which is punishable up to three years. But according to the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, when the medical certificate was received, the section was altered to Section ....

BASAVARAJ S/O SHIVANAND TIRLAPUR v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 3360

Offences alleged against accused are kidnapping under Section 140 (3) of BNS punishable with imprisonment for upto seven years; voluntarily causing hurt under Section 115 (2) of BNS punishable with imprisonment for upto one year; voluntarily causing grievous hurt under Section 118 (2) of BNS punishable ... Since offences under Sections 118 (2) and 109 of BNS attract maximum punishment of imprisonment for life, nature of offences would#HL_EN....

XXXXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1909

(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 118(1) - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 75 and ... Section 118(1) of B.N.S., which corresponds to Section 324 of the Penal Code, is extracted here below: “118. Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means. ... Primarily, Section 75 of the J.J. Act does not deal with any corporal punishment, or a ....

XXXXXXXXXX vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 38284

(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 118(1) - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 75 - ... Section 118 (1) of B.N.S., which corresponds to Section 324 of the Penal Code, is extracted here below: Section 75 of the J.J. Act does not deal with any corporal punishment, or a case which inflicts a direct hurt on the child. The actus reus recognized in Section 118#HL....

BATHULA SRINIVASA RAO vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16181

Section 118(2) of the Section 118(1) read with 3(5) of BNS . 2. Criminal Petition No.6005 of 2024, under Section 482 of Section 118(1) read with 3(5) of BNS . 3. ... Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State argued that this is a case of serious bodily hurt with specific overt acts alleged against the petitioners and the investigation is still pending and in cases of this nature anticipatory bail may no....

Bathula Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkaiah VS State Of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , through the Station House Officer, Inkollu Police Station - 2024 Supreme(AP) 357

That, one of the offences alleged against the petitioners is under Section 118(2) of the BNS for which the punishment provided is for imprisonment of life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend upto ten years and shall also be ... Criminal Petition No.6005 of 2024, under Section 482 of BNSS, is filed by the petitioner/A2 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.120 of 2024 of Inkollu Police Station, Bapatla District, registered for th....

JOHN FREDERICK vs STATE OF KERALA - 2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9394

Discharge - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections: 294(b), 323, 341, 506, 34; Kerala Police Act, 2011 - Section ... 118(a) - The court affirmed the lower court's rejection of a discharge petition, emphasizing required prima facie evidence and legal ... The offence alleged against the revision petitioner includes Section 323 which is the punishment for voluntarily causing hurt. ... It is elementary that for the purpose of causing an injury as contemplated under Section#HL_EN....

SUNIL KUMAR H vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20465

Section 5 of the Act 2019 deals with the punishment for committing a damaging act. Section 6 of the Act 2019 deals with punishment for committing a damaging act by fire or explosive substance. ... There are four accused in this case. In such circumstances, I think there can be a direction to the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/- each as a condition to grant bail. In this case also, the offence under section 118(1) BNS is alleged. ... If....

RAJESH vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12922

Considering the rival submissions, this Court notices that though initially petitioners were not alleged to have committed the offences under Section 118(2) of BNS, the said offence was subsequently added. ... The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that during the course of investigation, offence punishable under Section 118(2) BNS has been added, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are essential for the recovery of weapons. ... Having regard to the nature of the of....

N. Ramesh Kumar, IAS, S/o. Late Ravindranath Chowdary VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2020 Supreme(AP) 44

It is possible that when neither House of Parliament is in session, a situation may be arise which needs to be dealt with immediately and for which there is no adequate provision in the existing law and emergent legislation may be necessary to enable the executive to cope with the situation. What is to be done and how is the problem to be solved in such a case? Both Houses of Parliament being in recess, no legislation can be immediately undertaken and if the legislation is postponed until the House of Parliament meet damage may be caused to public weal. Article 123 therefor....

Fatema Khatun VS State Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 394

-Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both". This section provides the punishment that may be given to a person who voluntarily caused hurt. The offence voluntarily causing hurt is provided in section 321 of IPC.

Marani Nama VS Dilip Dutta - 2015 Supreme(Tri) 37

Apart that, there is no element of voluntariness which is sine qua non for the offence causing hurt to someone. Whoever does any act with the intention or thereby causing hurt to any person, or with knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause hurt to any person and does thereby cause hurt to any person, is said ‘voluntarily cause hurt’. ‘Voluntary causing hurt’ has been defined under Section 321 as under:

Man Vizhi VS Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai - 2014 Supreme(Mad) 4292

Section 325 (Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt) (Act endangering life or personal safety of others) Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt)

Ayoub Dedar VS State Of J. &K. - 2009 Supreme(J&K) 561

The statement of the victim duly corroborated by the prosecution witnesses, having regard to the above provisions of RPC, leads to the irresistible conclusion that the trial court was right in holding the appellant to have been guilty of causing voluntary hurt to the appellant. 10. Section 323 RPC prescribes punishment for causing voluntary hurt.