BACK TO SECTIONS
BNS 2024ACTIVE FRAMEWORK

Section 100

Culpable homicide

Replaces colonial-era: IPC 299

Non-BailableCognizable: YesCourt of Session

Reform Highlights

1

Direct renumbering from IPC 299 to BNS 100.

2

Definition preserved exactly — three alternative mens rea elements unchanged.

THE STATUTE

The Clause

Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.

Legal Commentary

Section 100 defines culpable homicide — the genus of which murder is the species. It is the foundational provision in the BNS's architecture for dealing with the taking of human life. The definition turns on three alternative mental states, each sufficient to establish the offence: (i) intention to cause death — the clearest case; (ii) intention to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death — where the offender aims not necessarily to kill but to cause serious harm, knowing death may result; and (iii) knowledge that the act is likely to cause death — where the offender may not intend any specific outcome but acts with awareness of the lethal risk. The third category captures reckless killings: a person who fires a gun into a crowd without targeting anyone specific has knowledge that death is likely, and is guilty of culpable homicide if death results. The distinction between culpable homicide and murder (defined in BNS 101) is one of the most complex and litigated questions in Indian criminal law. All murders are culpable homicides, but not all culpable homicides are murders. Murder requires a higher level of intentional or knowing conduct without any of the five mitigating circumstances (exceptions) listed in BNS 101.

Landmark Precedents

Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (1958)

AIR 1958 SC 465
RELEVANCE

Foundational Supreme Court analysis of the distinction between culpable homicide and murder — still the leading authority on how to apply BNS 100 and 101.

State of Andhra Pradesh v. Rayavarapu Punnayya (1976)

AIR 1977 SC 45
RELEVANCE

Supreme Court extensively examined the three degrees of culpable homicide and laid out the relationship between BNS 100 (definition), BNS 101 (murder), and BNS 105 (punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

Case Simulations

"Pushing a person off a cliff intentionally — culpable homicide (likely murder under BNS 101)."
"Stabbing a person in the arm not intending to kill, but knowing the artery could be severed and death could result — culpable homicide under the second or third limb of BNS 100."
"Firing a gun into an occupied room without targeting anyone — knowledge that death is likely; culpable homicide under the third limb."
"Giving a person with a known nut allergy food containing nuts without telling them — may be culpable homicide under the third limb if death results."

Expert Insights

No. The legal definition has been carried forward exactly from the IPC to ensure continuity in legal interpretation. All case law interpreting IPC 299 applies directly to BNS 100.
All murder is culpable homicide, but not all culpable homicide is murder. Murder (BNS 101) requires either an intention to kill, an intention to cause injury that is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, or extreme recklessness — without any of the five exceptions (sudden provocation, exceeding private defence, etc.). Culpable homicide not amounting to murder (BNS 105) is where one of those exceptions applies, reducing the severity.