Section 19 BNS 2023: Act Likely to Cause Harm but Done to Prevent Other Harm
Section 19 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is a general exception dealing with an act known to be likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intention to cause harm and in good faith to prevent or avoid other harm to a person or property.
Current legal status: The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is Act No. 45 of 2023. Section 19 is in Chapter III, "General Exceptions". The BNS came into force on July 1, 2024, except Section 106(2). That commencement exception does not affect Section 19.
Official text of Section 19, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
19. Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm.
Nothing is an offence merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm, if it be done without any criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to person or property.
Explanation to Section 19
It is a question of fact in such a case whether the harm to be prevented or avoided was of such a nature and so imminent as to justify or excuse the risk of doing the act with the knowledge that it was likely to cause harm.
Illustrations to Section 19
Illustration (a): A, the captain of a vessel, suddenly and without any fault or negligence on his part, finds himself in such a position that, before he can stop his vessel, he must inevitably run down a boat B, with twenty or thirty passengers on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that, by changing his course, he must incur risk of running down a boat C with only two passengers on board, which he may possibly clear.
Here, if A alters his course without any intention to run down the boat C and in good faith for the purpose of avoiding the danger to the passengers in the boat B, he is not guilty of an offence, though he may run down the boat C by doing an act which he knew was likely to cause that effect, if it be found as a matter of fact that the danger which he intended to avoid was such as to excuse him in incurring the risk of running down the boat C.
Illustration (b): A, in a great fire, pulls down houses in order to prevent the conflagration from spreading. He does this with the intention in good faith of saving human life or property.
Here, if it be found that the harm to be prevented was of such a nature and so imminent as to excuse A's act, A is not guilty of the offence.
What Section 19 means
Section 19 addresses situations in which a person knowingly takes an action that may cause harm because the action is intended, in good faith, to prevent or avoid another harm. The provision recognizes that an emergency may require a choice between competing risks.
Knowledge that the act is likely to cause harm does not by itself make the act an offence under this exception. The decisive conditions include the absence of criminal intention to cause harm, the presence of good faith, and the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to a person or property.
Essential conditions of Section 19
- Knowledge of likely harm: The person may know that the act is likely to cause harm.
- No criminal intention to cause harm: The person must act without criminal intention to cause the harm.
- Good faith: The act must be done in good faith.
- Preventing or avoiding other harm: The purpose must be to prevent or avoid other harm.
- Person or property: The other harm may concern a person or property.
- Nature and imminence of the danger: Whether the avoided harm was sufficiently serious and imminent to justify or excuse the risk is expressly treated as a question of fact.
Meaning of "good faith" under the BNS
Section 2(11) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provides that nothing is said to be done or believed in good faith if it is done or believed without due care and attention. Accordingly, the good-faith requirement in Section 19 is not satisfied merely by asserting a beneficial motive; due care and attention remain relevant.
Why imminence and proportionality of risk matter
The Explanation to Section 19 makes the nature and imminence of the threatened harm central to the inquiry. A court must consider whether the harm sought to be prevented was serious and immediate enough to justify or excuse knowingly taking the risk of causing another harm.
The vessel illustration demonstrates this balancing exercise. The captain knowingly changes course and creates a risk to a smaller boat in order to avoid an otherwise inevitable danger to a much larger number of passengers. The statutory protection ultimately depends on the factual finding that the danger sought to be avoided justified the risk taken.
Section 19 and nearby general exceptions
Section 18 deals with accident or misfortune in the doing of a lawful act, without criminal intention or knowledge and with proper care and caution. Section 19 differs because it expressly contemplates knowledge that harm is likely, while requiring the absence of criminal intention to cause harm and a good-faith purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm.
The next provision, Section 20, provides the general exception relating to an act of a child under seven years of age. The preceding provisions include Section 17, Section 16, Section 15, and Section 14.
Practical note: Application of Section 19 is fact-sensitive. The decision-maker must examine the danger sought to be prevented, its imminence, the risk knowingly taken, the actor's intention, and whether the act was genuinely performed in good faith to protect person or property.