Indian criminal law | General exceptions

IPC Section 77: Act of Judge When Acting Judicially - BNS Section 15

Section 77 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) protects a judge from criminal liability for acts done while acting judicially in the exercise of a power conferred by law, or a power the judge in good faith believes the law confers. Its corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) is Section 15.

Current legal position: The BNS came into force on 1 July 2024. BNS Section 15 is the corresponding provision for conduct governed by the new criminal law. IPC Section 77 remains important for older conduct and proceedings subject to applicable repeal and saving provisions. This page explains both.

Text of IPC Section 77: Act of Judge when acting judicially

Nothing is an offence which is done by a Judge when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which is, or which in good faith he believes to be, given to him by law.

The provision is a general exception to criminal liability, not a general exemption from all forms of legal accountability. The act must be judicial in nature and connected with actual or honestly believed lawful judicial power.

BNS Section 15: Act of Judge when acting judicially

Section 15 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 carries forward the principle of IPC Section 77: an act by a judge while acting judicially is not an offence when the judge exercises a power given by law or in good faith believes that power is given by law. It appears in the BNS chapter on general exceptions.

The statutory provision should be read alongside the BNS definition of good faith, which requires due care and attention, and the circumstances of the particular judicial act.

When does the exception apply?

Judicial capacity: The person must be acting as a judge in the exercise of a judicial function, rather than in a private or unrelated capacity.
Exercise of judicial power: The act must be performed while exercising a power actually granted by law, or a power honestly believed in good faith to have been granted by law.
Good-faith belief where authority is uncertain: A claim of mistaken authority must meet the statutory standard of good faith, including due care and attention.
Connection with the act: The exception does not automatically protect conduct outside the judicial function, such as a purely personal act or an act done for an unlawful private purpose.

Practical examples

Example 1: Judicial order within jurisdiction. A judge issues a lawful remand or attachment order in a proceeding over which the court has authority. The judicial act falls within the principle protected by IPC Section 77 or BNS Section 15, as applicable.

Example 2: Good-faith mistake about authority. A judge, after due care, exercises a power reasonably but mistakenly believed to be available under law. The provision may apply if the factual requirements of judicial action and good faith are established.

Example 3: Conduct unrelated to adjudication. A judge commits a private assault or accepts an unlawful gratification. Such conduct is not protected merely because the person holds judicial office; other criminal and anti-corruption laws may apply.

Related provisions and important distinctions

IPC Section 78 and BNS Section 16 address acts done pursuant to a judgment or order of a court, while it remains in force, under the statutory conditions. They are distinct from the protection for the judge's own judicial act under IPC Section 77 and BNS Section 15.

IPC Section 76 and BNS Section 14 concern acts done by persons bound by law, or persons who in good faith believe, due to a mistake of fact rather than law, that they are bound by law. The specific judicial-act provision has a different formulation.

The Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 provides additional statutory protections for judicial acts, subject to its terms. Criminal-law exceptions should also be distinguished from judicial review, appellate correction, disciplinary procedures, and other lawful accountability mechanisms.

Frequently asked questions

Does IPC Section 77 still apply after 1 July 2024?

The IPC was repealed by the BNS subject to saving provisions. For conduct governed by the BNS, the corresponding rule is Section 15. Earlier conduct may still be governed by the IPC under the applicable transitional rules.

Does Section 77 protect every act of a judge?

No. The act must be done while acting judicially and exercising an actual or good-faith-believed legal power. Merely holding judicial office is not enough.

Can a judicial decision still be appealed or reviewed?

Yes. An exception to criminal liability for a qualifying judicial act does not prevent a legally available appeal, revision, review, or other appropriate remedy.

What is the difference between IPC Section 77 and Section 78?

Section 77 concerns acts done by the judge when acting judicially. Section 78 concerns qualifying acts done by another person pursuant to a court's judgment or order.

Official legal references

Consult the enacted legislation and any applicable amendments or judicial decisions:

This article is general legal information, not advice on the facts of any particular case. The statutory text, commencement, transitional provisions and relevant case law should be checked before relying on a defence.