Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 · Chapter VI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of offences affecting life
Section 100: Culpable homicide
In plain words
Culpable homicide is causing death by an act done with the intention of causing death, or of causing a bodily injury likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. It is the wider offence, and murder is its most serious form.
- Speeding up the death of someone already ill or weak by injuring them counts as causing their death.
- It still counts even if proper medical treatment might have saved the person.
- Killing a child in the womb is not homicide, but killing a living child once any part of it has been born may be.
Example: A covers a pit with sticks and turf, intending someone to fall in and die. Z walks on it, falls and dies. A has committed culpable homicide.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓
Official text
Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
Illustrations
(a) A lays sticks and turf over a pit, with the intention of thereby causing death, or with the knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused. Z, believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed. A has committed the offence of culpable homicide.
(b) A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it. A, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. Here B may be guilty of no offence; but A has committed the offence of culpable homicide.
(c) A, by shooting at a fowl with intent to kill and steal it, kills B, who is behind a bush; A not knowing that he was there. Here, although A was doing an unlawful act, he was not guilty of culpable homicide, as he did not intend to kill B, or to cause death by doing an act that he knew was likely to cause death.
Explanation 1.—A person who causes bodily injury to another who is labouring under a disorder, disease or bodily infirmity, and thereby accelerates the death of that other, shall be deemed to have caused his death.
Explanation 2.—Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes such bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting to proper remedies and skilful treatment the death might have been prevented.
Explanation 3.—The causing of the death of a child in the mother’s womb is not homicide. But it may amount to culpable homicide to cause the death of a living child, if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 25 August 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Understanding this section
Section 100 of the BNS defines culpable homicide in exactly the same words as section 299 of the IPC, which it replaced. It is the gateway to every homicide offence: murder in section 101 is only a special, aggravated form of culpable homicide. So the first question in any killing is always whether it is culpable homicide at all, and only then whether it rises to murder.
Same words as the IPC
Because the wording is identical to section 299 of the IPC, the Supreme Court's long line of rulings on section 299 remains the natural guide to this section. When you read an older judgment that discusses section 299, you can apply its reasoning here.
The three mental states
Culpable homicide needs an act that causes death, done with one of three mental states, a ladder from most to least blameworthy.
- Intention of causing death: the accused wanted the person dead.
- Intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death: the accused meant to cause the injury, and that injury was likely to kill.
- Knowledge that the act is likely to cause death: no intention to kill or injure, only awareness of the risk of death.
Intention versus knowledge
Intention is purpose; knowledge is awareness. A person who throws a heavy stone onto a crowded road may not want anyone dead, but knows death is likely. Courts infer both from conduct: the weapon, the part of the body struck, the force used, and what was said and done before and after.
Likely means probable
Likely means probable, not merely possible. Section 101 uses stronger language for the same ideas, and that difference in the probability of death is what separates culpable homicide from murder.
Reading the illustrations
Illustration (a), the covered pit, shows intention or knowledge working through a trap. Illustration (b) shows that a person who uses an innocent agent (B, who fires not knowing Z is there) is the one guilty of culpable homicide. Illustration (c) is the classic warning: A, shooting at a fowl to steal it, kills a hidden person. A was doing an unlawful act, but without intention or knowledge regarding death, it is not culpable homicide.
Causation: the three Explanations
Explanation 1: speeding up the death of someone already ill or weak is causing death. You take your victim as you find them. Explanation 2: it is no defence that better treatment might have saved the victim. Explanation 3: killing a child in the womb is not homicide, but killing a living child once any part of it has been born can be culpable homicide, even before it breathes.
Punishment is in section 105
Section 100 only defines the offence. Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder is in section 105, which has two limbs: one where there was intention, one where there was only knowledge. Compared with section 304 of the IPC, the BNS adds a minimum of five years for the intention limb and makes a fine compulsory, not optional, in the knowledge limb.
Key Supreme Court rulings
State of Andhra Pradesh v. Rayavarapu Punnayya (1976) 4 SCC 382
Decided under section 299 of the IPC (same words as section 100). Explained that "culpable homicide" is genus and "murder" its specie, and that the Code recognises three degrees of culpable homicide graded by gravity.
Raja Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh 1994 INSC 86
Decided under the IPC. Where none of the clauses of murder applied, but the accused must be attributed knowledge that their acts were likely to cause death, the offence was culpable homicide under the knowledge limb, punishable with the lighter sentence.
Common mistakes
- Citing section 100 as the punishing section. Conviction is under section 105 (or section 103 if it is murder).
- Assuming every unlawful act that ends in death is culpable homicide. Illustration (c) shows it is not without the required intention or knowledge.
- Overlooking the new minimum of five years under section 105 when comparing with the old IPC section 304.
Read with: Section 101 BNS, Section 105 BNS, Section 299 IPC
Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 100
No Supreme Court judgment in our database cites this section yet.