Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide
Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide. Whoever does any act under such circumstances, that if he thereby caused death he would be guilty of culpable homicide, and does by such act cause the death of a quick unborn child, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Whoever does any act under such circumstances, that if he thereby caused death he would be guilty of culpable homicide, and does by such act cause the death of a quick unborn child, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Illustration.
A, knowing that he is likely to cause the death of a pregnant woman, does an act which, if it caused the death of the woman, would amount to culpable homicide. The woman is injured, but does not die; but the death of an unborn quick child with which she is pregnant is thereby caused. A is guilty of the offence defined in this section.
Section 92, The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act 45 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Penal Code
IPC 316 Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
| Offence | Punishment | Cognizable | Bailable | Triable by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Causing death of a quick unborn child by an act amounting to culpable homicide. | Imprisonment for 10 years and fine. | Cognizable. | Non-bailable. | Court of Session. |
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.
-
Dattatraya vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary
Decided under Indian Penal Code 316, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An act of pouring kerosene on a spouse during a sudden domestic quarrel in the heat of passion, without premeditation, constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC rather than murder under Section 302 IPC, when the offender lacks the intention to cause death despite having knowledge that such an act could cause death. The fourth exception to Section 300 IPC applies to such acts, and the offender's attempt to mitigate the harm (such as trying to extinguish the fire) further demonstrates the absence of intention to kill.
On this section: Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide; the appellant was convicted under this section for the death of the stillborn child, and the conviction was maintained.
-
Dr. L.sudhakar vs P.rama Krishna Reddy
Decided under Indian Penal Code 316, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Evidence of medical doctors in criminal negligence cases constitutes substantive evidence and cannot be admitted through notarized affidavits under Section 296 Cr.P.C. The procedure prescribed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for examination of complainant and witnesses upon oath, with substance reduced to writing and signed by all parties, is mandatory and cannot be defeated by adopting alternative procedures such as notarized affidavits, even if more convenient. The legality of interlocutory orders can be examined in a revision filed against final orders, notwithstanding that no direct revision lies against interlocutory orders.
On this section: Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide - applied to the death of the unborn child
-
Yasmeen vs State of U.p.
Decided under Indian Penal Code 316, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
High Court circulars issued for smooth functioning of trial courts and disposal of cases are merely directory in nature and do not create binding obligations on trial courts. A circular dated 29.10.2003 addressing crimes against women does not explicitly mandate that dowry death cases must be tried by Fast Track Courts. The transfer of a criminal case cannot be ordered merely on the basis of a High Court circular without demonstrating specific prejudice to the applicant or denial of fair trial in the existing court. The discretion of trial courts in case management, particularly when trial is substantially progressed and time-bound orders are in place, should be respected.
On this section: Causing death of child by exposure and abandonment - charge 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 92
What have the courts held on Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Dattatraya vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (01 Feb 2024) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IPC 316, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide; the appellant was convicted under this section for the death of the stillborn child, and the conviction was maintained. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2012 to 2024.
Is Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita bailable?
Non-bailable, under the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Is Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita cognizable?
Cognizable. "Cognizable" means a police officer may arrest without warrant; "non-cognizable" that they may not. An offence under this section is triable by Court of Session.
How do I find court cases under Section 92 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 92, section 92 BNS, section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 92 in ipc and bns 92 punishment. 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 Dattatraya vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (01 Feb 2024).
What should I read with Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward IPC 316 (Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita come into force?
Section 92 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, cited as BNS 92, 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.