BNS Section 27 - Act Done In Good Faith For Benefit Of Child Or Person With Unsound Mind, By Or By Consent Of Guardian

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is India's newly enacted criminal code. Section 27 of the BNS includes a provision that is intended to protect those acting in good faith in relation to vulnerable persons, specifically, minors under the age of twelve and those suffering from mental illness. Section 27 states that actions that may cause or are likely to cause harm will not be an offense where the actions are committed in good faith, in the interests of the child or an unsound mind person, and with the guardian or legal custodian's implied or express consent. 27 of the BNS will be of utmost importance for governing persons who are acting to be prompt in prescribing medical treatments, parenting decisions, and all kinds of other beneficial decisions and related actions. Without the anticipated protections in cases of actions that may involve harm, there would be serious concerns about whether certain necessary measures could be adopted by the decision-makers and those assisting them. Importantly, Section 27 of the BNS is the direct successor/testament of Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) legislation to permit the continuation of the legal principle, now in BNS, within India's criminal jurisprudence.

In this article, you will get to know about:

• Simplified Explanation of BNS Section 27.
• Key Details.
• Practical Examples Illustrating BNS Section 27.

Legal Provision

Section 27 of the BNS ‘Act done in good faith for benefit of child or person with unsound mind, by or by consent of guardian’ states:

Nothing which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under twelve years of age, or of person with mental illness, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause or be known by the doer to be likely to cause to that person;

Provided that this exception shall not extend to,

1. the intentional causing of death, or to the attempting to cause death;
2. the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely to cause death, for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity;
3. the voluntary causing of grievous hurt, or to the attempting to cause grievous hurt, unless it be for the purpose of preventing death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity;
4. the abetment of any offence, to the committing of which offence it would not extend.

Illustration: 'A' in good faith, for his child’s benefit without his child’s consent, has his child cut for the stone by a surgeon knowing it to be likely that the operation will cause the child’s death, but not intending to cause the child’s death. 'A' is within the exception, in as much as his object was the cure of the child.

Simplified Explanation

Section 27 of the BNS provides a basic statutory immunity to persons (such as parents, guardians, doctors) who take actions that may cause injury to a child under age 12 or to someone suffering from a mental illness, provided they comply with some limited conditions.

• Beneficiary Group: The protection is limited to acts done benefiting a person under the age of twelve or a person having a mental disorder. These are classes or types of persons who will now be recognised in law as lacking capacity or having limited capacity to give informed consent.
• Good Faith: The person performing the act must act in good faith, meaning that person must genuinely intend to provide benefit for the child or a person of unsound mind and not for an improper or selfish purpose styled as benefit.
• Consent of Guardian: The act must be done by the guardian or with the express (it is stated) or implied (implied from the circumstance or the behaviour of the guardian) consent of a guardian or other person with lawful control of the child or the person of unsound mind. This is giving a nod to a responsible adult in the consideration of the benefit that will be provided.
• Absence of Intent to Cause Death: The protection provided under this section would not apply to acts done with the intent to cause death or an act of attempted death. The act must be aimed at the benefit of the vulnerable person, not at the deliberate ending of life.

Exceptions to the Exception (Provisos): The section also includes important limitations (provisos) that specify situations where this protection will not apply, even if the above conditions are met:

• Intentional Causing or Attempting Death: As mentioned, any act done with the intention to cause death or an attempt to do so is never protected under this section.
• Knowledge of Likelihood of Death (Except for Prevention or Cure): If the person doing the act knows it is likely to cause death, it is not protected unless the purpose is to prevent death or grievous hurt, or to cure a grievous disease or infirmity. This allows for necessary but risky medical procedures.
• Voluntary Causing or Attempting Grievous Hurt (Except for Prevention or Cure): Voluntarily causing or attempting to cause grievous hurt is not protected unless it is for the purpose of preventing death or grievous hurt, or curing a grievous disease or infirmity. Minor harm might be acceptable if done in good faith for benefit with consent, but grievous hurt has stricter limitations.
• Abetment of Non-Protected Offenses: This section does not protect the abetment (encouraging or assisting) of any offense to which this very protection would not extend. You cannot use this section to justify helping someone else commit an act that would be excluded from this protection.

Key Details

Practical Examples Illustrating BNS Section 27

A few examples are:

Medical Treatment for a Child

Father 'A' in a good faith and on behalf of his child (who is under twelve years of age and cannot consent on his own), consents to a surgeon performing an operation on his child to remove a stone from his child. 'A' knows there is a possibility the operation will cause the death of the child, but 'A' does not intend for his child to die; he only intends to relieve the painful condition of the child. Under BNS Section 27, 'A' is protected because he acted in good faith for the benefit of the child, he consented as guardian, and his object was the cure of the child, which fits within the exception to the proviso concerning actions known to be likely to cause death.

Restraining a Person with Mental Illness

A caregiver at a mental health facility, acting in good faith and for the safety of a person with severe mental illness and with the consent of that person's legal guardian, uses a restraint during an episode of agitation to prevent the person from causing harm to themselves or others. If the restraint causes minor bruises, that caregiver would likely be indemnified against a common law tort in BNS Section 27, because the action was for the benefit of the person with mental illness, had not been taken with an intention of causing grievous hurt, was purportedly intended simply to prevent greater harm, that it had been taken in good faith, and it was authorized with the consent of the guardian.

Key Improvements And Changes: IPC Section 89 To BNS Section 27

There are no substantive changes in the wording or the core legal principle between IPC Section 89 and BNS Section 27. The only difference is the Section numbers in the new legislative framework of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. As a result, rather than discussing "amendments and changes," it is more accurate to say that BNS Section 27 is simply a continuation and renumbering of the current IPC Section 89. This continuity satisfies all the key components of an established legal principle, which incorporates protection for actions taken in good faith with the consent of the beneficiaries, which the legislation highlights as children or persons of unsound mind.

recodified

Conclusion

Section 27 of the BNS, which operates similarly to s 89 of the IPC, is an important provision that recognizes the special vulnerabilities of those under twelve years of age and those with mental illness. It represents an important legal framework that allows for guardians and other lawful persons in charge to base decisions on the child’s best interests without the requirement of liability for harm created, even harm that involves risk of harm (provided good faith is exercised with consent). The extensive restrictions ensure that this protection cannot be extended to take account of those who intend or know death is likely to be caused (excepting narrow medical situations) or the voluntary causing grievous hurt (again, with narrow exceptions to cure serious diseases/injuries or prevent grievous hurt or cause death). By crafting a limited exception in the BNS, Indian law continues to maintain protections with respect to these vulnerable populations while reminding us that it is our disregard or harmful intent that makes or carries liability for harm.

FAQs

A few FAQs are:

Q1. Why was IPC Section 89 revised and replaced with BNS Section 27?

IPC Section 89 was not substantively revised. The enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is a comprehensive overhaul of India's criminal laws, replacing the IPC. As part of this process, all existing provisions of the IPC have been recodified and renumbered within the BNS. BNS Section 27 is simply the new designation for the same legal principle previously articulated in IPC Section 89.

Q2. What are the main differences between IPC Section 89 and BNS Section 27?

The primary difference is the change in section number. The language, the core legal principle regarding the protection of acts done in good faith for the benefit of children and persons with mental illness with guardian's consent, and the provisos remain identical in both IPC Section 89 and BNS Section 27.

Q3. Is BNS Section 27 a bailable or non-bailable offense?

BNS Section 27 does not define an offense itself. It provides an exception to liability for acts that might otherwise be offenses. Therefore, the question of whether it is bailable or non-bailable is not directly applicable to this section. The bailability of the underlying act that caused harm would depend on the nature and severity of that act as defined in other sections of the BNS and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the new code replacing the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Q4. What is the punishment for offense under BNS Section 27?

BNS Section 27 does not prescribe a punishment. It provides a defense against liability for an act that might otherwise be an offense. If the conditions of Section 27 are met, no offense is deemed to have been committed under this specific provision. The punishment would be relevant only if the act falls outside the scope of this exception and constitutes an offense under other sections of the BNS.

Q5. What is the fine imposed under BNS Section 27?

Similar to punishment, BNS Section 27 does not impose a fine. It provides a defense against criminal liability. Any fine would be associated with the specific offense committed under other sections of the BNS if the protection of Section 27 does not apply.

Q6. Is the offense under BNS Section 27 cognizable or non-cognizable?

Again, BNS Section 27 does not define an offense. It provides an exception to liability. The cognizability (whether the police can arrest without a warrant) of the underlying act that caused harm would depend on the nature of that act as defined in other sections of the BNS and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The principles of Section 27 would be considered when determining if that act constitutes an offense in the first place.

Q7. What is the BNS Section 27 equivalent of IPC Section 89?

BNS Section 27 is the direct and exact equivalent of IPC Section 89. They contain the same wording, provisos, illustration, and establish the same legal principle regarding the protection of acts done in good faith for the benefit of children under twelve years of age and persons with mental illness, by or with the consent of their guardian. The only change is the section number within the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.