Grievous hurt
Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with grievous hurt. The following kinds of hurt only are designated as "grievous":- First.-Emasculation. The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
The following kinds of hurt only are designated as "grievous":-
First.-Emasculation.
Secondly.-Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.
Thirdly.-Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
Fourthly.-Privation of any member or joint.
Fifthly.-Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.
Sixthly.-Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.
Seventhly.-Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.
Eighthly.-Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.
Section 320, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 116 Grievous hurt Text carried over almost unchanged 93%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Referred to by 30
- Andaman and Nicobar Islands Excise Regulati0n s. 36
- Andhra Pradesh Excise Act s. 37
- Assam Police Act s. 78
- Assam Police Act, 2007 (Single Document) s. 78
- Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act s. 7
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act s. 34 Penalty for mixing noxious substance with liquor
- Consumer Protection Act s. 90 Punishment for manufacturing for sale or storing, selling or distributing or importing products containing adulterant
- Delhi Excise Act s. 35
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act s. 27 Penalty for manufacture, sale, etc., of drugs in contravention of this Chapter
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules s. 26 Purchaser of drug or cosmetic enabled to obtain test or analysis
- Epidemic Diseases Act s. 3 Penalty
- Himachal Pradesh Armed Bands (Arrest and Detention) Act s. 2 Definitions
and 18 more
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.
-
Mathai v. State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
IPC s.320 defines the only kinds of hurt designated as grievous; a conviction for voluntarily causing grievous hurt requires that one of the s.320 clauses be strictly proved. Tooth fracture is grievous hurt under s.320 seventhly. Whether a stone is a ‘dangerous weapon’ under s.326 depends on size and facts — here it was not — so conviction is altered to s.325, but the s.320 grievous-hurt finding stands.
On this section: s.320 — definition of grievous hurt applied; tooth fracture held grievous; strict proof of a s.320 clause required
-
Jameel vs State of U. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases of attempt to commit culpable homicide (Section 308 IPC) involving grievous hurt (specifically fracture of bone as defined in Section 320 IPC clause 7) caused by use of dangerous weapon (lathi) with criminal intention and prior enmity, a sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment is reasonable, appropriate, and proportional to the gravity of the offence. The sentencing courts must consider illustrative factors including motive, prior enmity, intention of the accused, gravity and nature of injury, nature and size of weapon used, and force of blow inflicted, to ensure that appropriate sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence is imposed. The burden is on the court to ensure proper and appropriate sentence as a bounded obligation and duty, reflecting the gravity of the offence.
On this section: Definition of grievous hurt; the court applied this section to classify the skull fracture as a grievous hurt, specifically under the 'Seventhly' clause (fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth)
-
Dasan vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When evidence does not consistently and certainly establish the use of a dangerous weapon in an assault case, and the recovered weapon and victim's own pleadings indicate use of a non-dangerous weapon (such as a wooden stick), the conviction for causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon (Section 326 IPC) should be converted to voluntarily causing grievous hurt (Section 325 IPC). Once so converted, the court may grant permission to compound the offence under Section 325 IPC when the victim and accused have amicably settled, subject to strict compliance with Section 320 CrPC which governs the entire field of compounding of offences. The court's discretionary powers under Article 142 cannot be exercised to circumvent or override the statutory restrictions prescribed in Section 320 CrPC.
On this section: Definition and nature of grievous hurt
-
Soman vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The consequences of a criminal act, including death resulting from the offender's conduct, can legitimately be considered as an aggravating factor in sentencing when: (1) the consequences were reasonably foreseeable to the offender; (2) the sentencing court is applying a proportionality analysis to ensure sentence is commensurate with the seriousness of the offence; and (3) the consequences enhance the harmfulness of the original offence. In cases of spurious liquor manufacture, distribution, and retail sale, all participants in the distribution chain can reasonably foresee the toxicity risk, and actual harm (particularly death) to consumers constitutes a legitimate and relevant consideration in determining appropriate punishment within statutory sentencing ranges, though consistency with similarly situated co-accused must be maintained.
On this section: Definition of grievous hurt referenced in explanation to Section 57A
-
Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a dead body is recovered and subjected to autopsy and necrotomic evidence is adduced to establish cause of death, failure to prove that the dead body is of the person allegedly murdered by the accused must have fatal and adverse consequence on the prosecution case. The case of an untraceable dead body is different from a case where the dead body is traced and evidence is adduced to prove the identity of the deceased. In the latter case, upon failure to prove identity, the prosecution cannot be permitted to advance a case that the dead body is untraceable. However, this principle applies only when the prosecution itself has put forth the case that the dead body was recovered. In such circumstances, when once identification of the dead body as that of the alleged victim based on fingerprint test is reversed by the High Court, in the absence of appeal by the State or the victim, it cannot be said that the dead body is that of the alleged victim, either for holding the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC or under Section 304 IPC. (Justice C.T. Ravikumar's view, which represents the majority position on this specific issue)
On this section: Definition of hurt; discussed in context of injuries sustained by Shama in custody
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 320
What have the courts held on Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code?
Mathai v. State of Kerala (12 Jan 2005) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.320 — definition of grievous hurt applied; tooth fracture held grievous; strict proof of a s.320 clause required. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2005 to 2024.
How do I find court cases under Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code?
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: IPC 320, section 320 IPC, section 320 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 320 in bns and ipc 320 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Mathai v. State of Kerala (12 Jan 2005).
What should I read with Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
30 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 116 (Grievous hurt), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 320, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.