IPC Section 93 and BNS Section 31: Communication Made in Good Faith

Section 93 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) protected a communication made in good faith for the benefit of its recipient from criminal liability arising solely from harm caused by that communication. The corresponding provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), is Section 31, which came into force on 1 July 2024.

1. Statutory provision: IPC Section 93

No communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person.

2. Corresponding law: BNS Section 31

Section 31, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Communication made in good faith, retains the same substantive statutory rule as IPC Section 93. It is placed in Chapter III, General Exceptions. The protection concerns harm arising from a beneficial communication made in good faith; it is not an unrestricted defence for unlawful conduct.

3. Statutory illustration

A, a surgeon, in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live. The patient dies in consequence of the shock. A has committed no offence, though he knew it to be likely that the communication might cause the patient's death.

Meaning: A surgeon who communicates a grave medical opinion honestly, with due care and for the patient's benefit, does not commit an offence merely because the patient suffers a fatal shock from the information. The statutory illustration assumes the communication was genuinely in good faith.

4. Conditions for the general exception

1. Communication: The alleged harm must arise from information or an opinion communicated to the person concerned.
2. Good faith: The communicator must act with due care and attention. Under BNS Section 2, the definition of good faith excludes acts or beliefs undertaken without due care and attention; the corresponding IPC definition appeared in Section 52.
3. Recipient's benefit: The communication must be intended for the benefit of the person receiving it, rather than merely to embarrass, intimidate or injure that person.
4. Connection to harm: The protection addresses an allegation of offence arising by reason of harm caused by the beneficial communication.

5. Scope and practical application

The provision is particularly relevant to sensitive disclosures, including medical advice. For example, informing a patient of a serious diagnosis after appropriate professional assessment may cause distress, but distress alone does not negate the exception when the legal conditions are satisfied.

Whether the exception applies depends on the actual facts, including the communicator's purpose, care, knowledge and circumstances. It does not automatically excuse threats, intentional abuse, deception, breaches of statutory duties or other independent offences.

6. IPC Section 93 and BNS Section 31 compared

7. Frequently asked questions

Is IPC Section 93 still in force?

The IPC was repealed as part of the transition to the BNS on 1 July 2024. IPC provisions may still be relevant to earlier acts and proceedings under the applicable savings rules.

What is the equivalent of IPC Section 93 in the BNS?

Section 31 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Does every truthful statement qualify as good faith?

No. Truth alone is not the full statutory test. The communication must be made in good faith and for the recipient's benefit; due care and attention matter.

8. Official legal sources

• India Code - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
• Bureau of Police Research and Development - BNS official text (PDF)
• BPR&D - New criminal laws and government resources
• National Crime Records Bureau - BNS section index

Legal information updated 28 October 2026. The statutory text and applicable judicial decisions prevail over this general explanation.