Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt on provocation
Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt on provocation. Whoever voluntarily causes hurt on grave and sudden provocation, if he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause hurt to any person other than the person who gave the provocation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one month, or wit The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Whoever voluntarily causes hurt on grave and sudden provocation, if he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause hurt to any person other than the person who gave the provocation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
(2) Whoever voluntarily causes grievous hurt on grave and sudden provocation, if he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause grievous hurt to any person other than the person who gave the provocation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both.
Explanation.---This section is subject to the same proviso as Exception 1 of section 101.
Section 122, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 334 Voluntarily causing hurt on provocation Text carried over almost unchanged 89%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
How this offence is classified
From the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which classifies every offence under the Sanhita. Cognizable means a police officer may arrest without warrant; bailable means bail is a matter of right rather than of the court's discretion. This section is classified 2 ways.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntarily causing hurt on grave and sudden provocation, not intending to hurt any other than the person who gave the provocation. | Imprisonment for 1 month, or fine of 5,000 rupees, or both. | Non-cognizable. | Bailable. | Any Magistrate. |
| Causing grievous hurt on grave and sudden provocation, not intending to hurt any other than the person who gave the provocation. | Imprisonment for 5 years, or fine of 10,000 rupees, or both. | Cognizable. | Bailable. | Magistrate of the first class. |
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
State of U. P vs Sheo Lal
Decided under Indian Penal Code 334, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The absence of moonlight or artificial light in the FIR does not per se preclude reliable identification of assailants when: (1) the assailants are closely related and well-known to the witnesses; (2) there is proximity and confrontation between parties; (3) some ambient light is available (stars, glow from surroundings); (4) the location is roofless or open; and (5) the logical principle applies that light sufficient for assailants to identify and target victims is equally sufficient for victims to identify assailants. In such circumstances, eyewitness evidence of identification, particularly from injured witnesses, must be given substantial weight. The non-establishment of motive alone is not sufficient to discard a prosecution case supported by credible eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence. Courts must apply careful scrutiny to evidence and must not reject testimony merely because certain technical details were not recorded in procedural documents.
On this section: Voluntarily causing hurt in committing or attempting to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment - applied in conjunction with other sections
-
State Government vs velu and 2 others
Decided under Indian Penal Code 334, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In a criminal trial, the prosecution bears the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. When the evidence of interested witnesses (related to the injured person) is inconsistent regarding the place of occurrence, the weapons used, and the specific injuries caused by each accused, and when there is no independent corroborating evidence or independent eye witness, and when there is unexplained delay in registration of the First Information Report, the court must give the benefit of doubt to the accused and acquit them. The cardinal principle that guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt cannot be compromised by circumstantial evidence or interested witness testimony alone.
On this section: Exception to hurt offences - act of a person who causes hurt in good faith for the benefit of a person without consent. Referenced as a potential exception that prosecution must disprove.
-
Tabrage vs State of U.p.
Decided under Indian Penal Code 335, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings in the interest of justice, such powers are discretionary and must be exercised sparingly. In cases where the accused seeks to surrender voluntarily and pursue bail through proper legal channels, the court may grant protective directions including a moratorium on coercive measures to facilitate fair access to justice, even if the quashing prayer is not granted.
On this section: Section 335 IPC pertains to criminal intimidation. This was the second charge against the accused in the underlying criminal case.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 122
What have the courts held on Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
State of U. P vs Sheo Lal (12 Feb 2009) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 334, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Voluntarily causing hurt in committing or attempting to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment - applied in conjunction with other sections. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2009 to 2023.
Is Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Non-cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Any Magistrate.
How do I find court cases under Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNS 122, section 122 BNS, section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 122 1 in hindi and bns 122(2). Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with State of U. P vs Sheo Lal (12 Feb 2009).
What should I read with Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 101 (Murder), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward IPC 334 (Voluntarily causing hurt on provocation), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 122 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 122, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions2199 words
- 356. Defamation1543 words
- 335. Making a false document1318 words
- 101. Murder1177 words
- 303. Theft1104 words
- 3. General explanations858 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.