Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated
Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated. In cases where an act done is not an offence unless done with a particular knowledge or intent, a person who does the act in a state of intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if he had the same knowledge as he would have had if he had not been intoxicated, unless the thing which intoxicate 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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.
In cases where an act done is not an offence unless done with a particular knowledge or intent, a person who does the act in a state of intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if he had the same knowledge as he would have had if he had not been intoxicated, unless the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.
Section 86, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 24 Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Chherturam @ Chainu vs The State of Chhattisgarh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The nature, number, and location of injuries inflicted during a sudden fight, even without premeditation, can demonstrate cruelty and brutality such that Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC does not apply. When injuries are inflicted on vital body parts in a merciless manner with repeated blows that make survival impossible, the act constitutes murder under Section 302 IPC, and intoxication does not provide a defense under Section 86 IPC. The conviction for murder must be upheld despite the absence of prior premeditation when the factual circumstances demonstrate an endeavor to end the victim's life through brutal and cruel means.
On this section: Intoxication does not provide defense when the offense requires particular knowledge or intent; intoxicated person liable as if not intoxicated
-
Paul vs The State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an act amounts to culpable homicide and falls within any of the four clauses of Section 300 IPC, and the accused fails to establish that the case falls within any of the five exceptions enumerated in Section 300 IPC, the offence constitutes murder punishable under Section 302 IPC. The burden on the accused to prove exceptions is by preponderance of probability, but the prosecution burden to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt never shifts. An accused cannot escape the consequences of an act attracting the ingredients of murder by merely pointing to Section 304 IPC. The fact that a false case is set up by the accused does not deprive him of the right to establish that the case falls within exceptions to murder, but such exceptions must be supported by evidence on record. In cases of throttling resulting in death, the presence of injuries on the neck and other parts of the body, combined with the absence of credible explanation from the accused regarding what transpired in the privacy of the bedroom, establishes murder beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Offence requiring particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated; court held that despite intoxication, the appellant can be presumed to have intended the natural consequences of his act
-
Rankanidhi Behera vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The testimony of a child witness aged 11-12 years, when subjected to heightened scrutiny and found to be clear, cogent, reliable and trustworthy, can form the sole basis for conviction in a murder case, particularly when: (1) the child's presence at the scene of occurrence is natural and undisputed; (2) the child's testimony is corroborated by medical evidence and recovery evidence; (3) the child witness demonstrates confidence and consistency in core facts despite minor contradictions in peripheral details; (4) the trial judge's observation regarding the demeanor of the child witness supports credibility; and (5) voluntary intoxication of the accused cannot serve as a defense to negate the intention required for murder under Section 302 IPC.
On this section: Presumption regarding act of person who is intoxicated. Court held that despite intoxication, the accused cannot ward off consequences of his act; intoxication does not negate the knowledge or intention required for murder.
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 86
What have the courts held on Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code?
Chherturam @ Chainu vs The State of Chhattisgarh (13 Sep 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Intoxication does not provide defense when the offense requires particular knowledge or intent; intoxicated person liable as if not intoxicated. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2020 to 2024.
How do I find court cases under Section 86 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 86, section 86 IPC, section 86 of the Indian Penal Code. 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 Chherturam @ Chainu vs The State of Chhattisgarh (13 Sep 2022).
What should I read with Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 24 (Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 86, 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.