Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter IV: General Exceptions
Section 90: Consent known to be given under fear or misconception
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
A consent is not such a consent as is intended by any section of this Code, if the consent is given by a person under fear of injury, or under a misconception of fact, and if the person doing the act knows, or has reason to believe, that the consent was given in consequence of such fear or misconception; or Consent of insane person.—if the consent is given by a person who, from unsoundness of mind, or intoxication, is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that to which he gives his consent; or Consent of child.—unless the contrary appears from the context, if the consent is given by a person who is under twelve years of age.
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 (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. 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.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 90
-
Amol Bhagwan Nehul v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of order passed by the High Court dismissing the petition whereby the appellant sought quashing of criminal case against him that the appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with…
-
Jothiragawan v. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police & Anr.
Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant-accused ought to be quashed.
-
Rajnish Singh @ Soni v. State of U.P. and Another
Matter pertains to the liability of the appellant to be prosecuted for committing rape upon the complainant by giving her a false promise of marriage; and the correctness of the order passed by the High Court dismissing…
-
Manish Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
The appellant herein has sought to quash proceedings for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 504 and 506, Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r),3(1)(s), 3(2)(5a) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the…
-
Mahesh Damu Khare v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The High Court dismissed the petition filed u/s.482 of CrPC for quashing FIR registered u/ss.376, 420, 504 and 506 IPC holding, inter alia, that the offence under Section 376 of IPC is an offence against the society…
-
Shiv Pratap Singh Rana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
The prosecutrix had lodged an FIR u/s. 376(2)(n) and s.506 of IPC on 06.09.2018 against the appellant. The charges u/s. 376(2) (n) and s.506 of IPC were framed against the appellant and the application for discharge…
- Naim Ahamed v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- Shambhu Kharwar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Ms. P Xxx v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr
- Maheshwar Tigga v. The State of Jharkhand
- Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors.
- Vinod Kumar v. State of Kerala
- Kaini Rajan v. State of Kerala
- Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana
- State of U.P. v. Chhoteylal
- Satpal Singh v. State of Haryana
- Pradeep Kumar@ Pradeep Kumar Verma v. State of Bihar and Anr.
- Yedla Srinivasa Rao v. State of A.P.
- Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar v. State of Bihar
- Uday v. State of Karnataka