Indian criminal law | Updated October 2026

Section 377 IPC: Unnatural Offences, Punishment and Important Case Laws

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 historically dealt with certain acts described as "unnatural offences." Its application was substantially limited by the Supreme Court in 2018. The IPC was subsequently repealed and replaced for new offences by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), effective 1 July 2024.

Current legal position: Section 377 IPC is not reproduced as a standalone offence in the BNS. Consensual sexual activity between adults in private cannot be criminalised merely on the basis of the former Section 377. Allegations of sexual violence, child sexual abuse or bestiality require careful examination of the applicable law and date of the alleged act; the BNS does not contain a blanket equivalent to the former Section 377.

Original text of Section 377 IPC

377. Unnatural offences. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation. Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.

This is the historical statutory wording, not a statement that the provision continues to apply to conduct after its repeal. Its constitutional operation was restricted by subsequent judicial decisions.

Meaning and essential elements under the former provision

Historically, Section 377 used the expression "carnal intercourse against the order of nature." The statutory explanation made penetration sufficient for the act described in the provision. The scope of the section was shaped by judicial interpretation, and its application to consensual acts between adults was later held unconstitutional.

Punishment under Section 377 IPC

The historical text prescribed imprisonment for life or imprisonment of either description for a term extending to ten years, along with liability to a fine. This penalty must be read subject to the constitutional limitation imposed by the Supreme Court and the law applicable on the date of the alleged offence.

Supreme Court rulings and case laws

Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)

In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held Section 377 unconstitutional insofar as it criminalised consensual sexual conduct between adults in private. The Court emphasised constitutional rights including equality, dignity, privacy and autonomy. The decision did not invalidate the provision in every other context.

National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014)

In National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438, the Supreme Court recognised fundamental rights of transgender persons, including recognition of gender identity. This decision forms part of the constitutional background concerning dignity and equal protection.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017)

In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, a nine-judge bench affirmed the fundamental right to privacy. Its reasoning on decisional autonomy and intimate choices informed the subsequent constitutional examination of Section 377.

Fazal Rab Choudhary v. State of Bihar

Fazal Rab Choudhary v. State of Bihar, 1983 Cri LJ 632 (SC), is an earlier decision cited in discussions of Section 377 and sentencing. It should be read in its historical context and subject to later constitutional developments.

Brother John Antony v. State

Brother John Antony v. State, 1992 Cri LJ 1352 (Mad), is an earlier Madras High Court decision associated with the former provision. Any reliance on its reasoning must account for later Supreme Court decisions and the repeal of the IPC.

Position after the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

The BNS came into force on 1 July 2024, replacing the IPC for offences committed from that date, subject to relevant commencement and saving provisions. The BNS contains no provision directly reproducing Section 377 IPC. It would therefore be incorrect to describe Section 377 as a currently operative BNS offence or to assign it a new BNS section number.

Depending on the facts, other laws may apply, including BNS provisions concerning sexual offences against women, assault or hurt, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) for sexual offences against children. These laws are not universal substitutes for every category previously covered by Section 377, and their elements must be separately established.

What happens to older Section 377 cases?

Repeal does not automatically erase liabilities, investigations or proceedings concerning alleged offences committed before 1 July 2024. The repeal-and-savings framework, including Section 358 of the BNS and the applicable principles of the General Clauses Act, 1897, must be considered. Constitutional protections recognised in Navtej Singh Johar also remain relevant.

Frequently asked questions

Is Section 377 IPC still in force?

No. The IPC was repealed with effect from 1 July 2024, subject to savings for earlier matters. The BNS does not recreate Section 377 as a separate offence.

Is consensual same-sex activity between adults a crime in India?

No. The Supreme Court's 2018 judgment protects consensual sexual conduct between adults in private from criminalisation under the former Section 377.

Does the BNS have a replacement for Section 377?

No direct replacement exists. Whether another offence applies depends on the complainant, the alleged conduct, age, consent and other statutory ingredients.

Official legal sources

Legal information only. The law applicable to a particular incident depends on its date and facts, and on subsequent judicial decisions or amendments.