Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter IV: General Exceptions · Of the Right of Private Defence
Section 106: Right of private defence against deadly assault when there is risk of harm to inno cent person
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
In plain words
If, while defending against an assault that reasonably causes fear of death, the defender cannot effectively defend without risk of harm to an innocent person, the right of private defence extends to running that risk.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
If in the exercise of the right of private defence against an assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private defence extends to the running of that risk.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 106
-
Devendra Kumar v. The State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
High Court affirmed the order passed by the CMM directing registration of the FIR against the petitioner for offences punishable u/ss.186 and 341, Penal Code, 1860. Whether the CMM erred in involving the police in a…
-
Chunni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the accused at the time of commission of crime was incapable of making conscious and informed decision or was suffering from certain mental incapacity or unsoundness of mind; Whether a benefit of doubt may be…
- Ex. Ct. Mahadev v. The Director General, Boarder Security Force & Ors.
- Sukumaran v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police
- Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (Eevfam) & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.
- Raj Singh v. State of Haryana Etc.
- Dr. Mohammad Khalil Chisti v. State of Rajasthan
- Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.
- Abid v. State of U. P.
- Madan and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Bhanwar Singh & Ors. v. State of M.P.
- Kashi Ram & Others v. State of Rajasthan
- State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram
- Krishnan v. State of Tamil Nadu
- State of Rajasthan v. Ram Bharosi and Ors.
- Rajinder and Ors. v. State of Haryana