Section 23 BNS: Act of Person Incapable of Judgment Due to Intoxication

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) introduces a progressive shift in Indian criminal law by replacing the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Among the important updates is Section 23 BNS, which focuses on the effect of involuntary intoxication on criminal responsibility. This provision recognizes that certain individuals may commit an act while intoxicated without having any understanding of its nature or legal consequences because the intoxication was not voluntary .

Section 23 of BNS plays a key role in ensuring that only those who act with criminal intent are held accountable. It reflects a deeper understanding of mental incapacity and legal fairness particularly in cases where the mind has been impaired without the person's consent . By differentiating such scenarios from voluntary intoxication, the law upholds the fundamental concept of mens rea—a guilty mind—as necessary for punishment.

This update in the law ensures that modern criminal jurisprudence is both just and humane. Explore other important Judiciary Notes.

Section 23 BNS

Act of a person incapable of judgment by reason of intoxication caused against his will

Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong, or contrary to law; provided that the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.

Note: "The information provided above has been sourced from the official website, i.e., Indian Code. While the content has been presented here for reference, no modifications have been made to the original laws and orders" 

📚 Exclusive Free Preparation Toolkit For Law Aspirants

Particulars	PDF Link
Download the Free Landmark Judgements PDF curated by judiciary experts	Download Link
Access the Free Bare Acts PDF Collection for quick and effective revision	Download Link
Simplify your prep with this Free Constitutional Articles PDF	Download Link
Stay updated with the Free Recent Judgements PDF every aspirant needs	Download Link
Power through your syllabus with this Free Important Judiciary Notes PDF	Download Link
Prepare smartly with the Free 365 Day Judiciary Prep Planner PDF	Download Link

Free Download PDF on Section 23 BNS

Section 23 of BNS replaces Section 85 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provides a specific defense in cases of involuntary intoxication . It essentially protects individuals who were intoxicated without their knowledge or against their will, and therefore lacked the ability to understand the nature of their actions or their legal wrongfulness.

This section sets out two critical conditions:

• Involuntary Intoxication : The intoxicating substance must have been administered without the person's knowledge or against their will. This means the individual did not voluntarily consume alcohol or any other substance that led to their impaired state.
• Incapacity of Judgment: As a result of the intoxication, the person must have been incapable of understanding what they were doing, or unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time the act was committed.

If both conditions are fulfilled, the law clearly states that the act will not be considered an offense under the BNS.

The section draws a line between genuine incapacity due to forced intoxication and self-induced drunkenness . It emphasizes that the criminal law should not punish individuals who lacked control and intent due to circumstances beyond their control. BNS Section 23 preserves justice by ensuring that only those with conscious criminal intent are prosecuted thereby aligning with the core values of criminal liability.

Section 23 BNS Essential Elements 

To successfully invoke the protection provided under Section 23 of BNS Act, the following essential elements must be proven:

• Involuntary Nature of Intoxication: The accused must establish that the intoxicating substance was consumed unknowingly or under coercion. This excludes all forms of voluntary consumption.
• Loss of Mental Capacity : At the time of the incident, the individual must have lacked the cognitive ability to either understand the nature of their actions or comprehend that their conduct was illegal or morally wrong.
• Causal Link: A clear link must be established between the involuntary intoxication and the mental incapacity that led to the act in question.

If any one of these elements is not convincingly demonstrated, the protection under Section 23 BNS may not be granted. Thus, this section sets a high bar to prevent misuse while still offering fair protection to the truly incapacitated.

Section 23 BNS Nature and Scope 

Section 23 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 operates as a general exception within the criminal justice framework . Its nature is protective rather than punitive. The section seeks to shield individuals who are genuinely incapable of forming criminal intent due to involuntary intoxication recognizing their lack of mens rea.

The scope of this provision is limited to situations where intoxication was not self-induced . If the accused knowingly consumed an intoxicant even under peer pressure or minor persuasion the law does not excuse the act.

Moreover, this section does not grant blanket immunity. The intoxication must lead to a complete inability to understand the wrongful nature of the act. Courts often interpret this narrowly to ensure that only genuine cases of mental incapacity are protected.

In essence, BNS Section 23 balances individual rights with public safety, ensuring that justice accounts for both mental state and fairness.

Comparison Between IPC and BNS

Before BNS, similar conduct was covered under section 85 of  Indian Penal Code (IPC). The transition to Section 23 BNS preserved the structure while fitting into the reformed legal framework under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

Legal Principle	Section 85 IPC	Section 23 BNS
Focus	Acts committed under intoxication not self-induced	Criminal liability under involuntary intoxication
Applicability	Applies when accused was intoxicated against their will	Applies when intoxication renders accused mentally unaware
Accused’s Position	Person under influence of substance involuntarily	Accused lacking understanding due to involuntary intoxication
Mental Incapacity Considered	Yes, must result from involuntary intoxication	Yes, central to the exemption
Voluntary vs Involuntary	Only involuntary intoxication recognized	Clearly distinguishes voluntary (Section 24) and involuntary (Section 23)
Defense Allowed	Yes, if intoxication was without consent and causes incapacity	Yes, if both involuntariness and mental incapacity are proven

This evolution demonstrates a more nuanced understanding of culpability and intention in modern law.

Section 23 BNS Judicial Interpretation 

Although Section 23 BNS is new, Indian courts have consistently addressed similar scenarios under Section 85 IPC, which shares near-identical language. Courts have reiterated that intoxication, as a defense, is valid only when it is involuntary and leads to complete incapacity.

In Basdev v. State of Pepsu, the court held that intoxication must render the person incapable of understanding their actions. Likewise, in Jethu Ram v. State of MP, it was established that being persuaded to drink does not count as involuntary if done with consent.

These rulings suggest that Section 23 of BNS Act will also be interpreted conservatively to prevent misuse. The judiciary will require clear, convincing evidence of both the involuntary nature and the mental incapacity resulting from the intoxication.

Such interpretations ensure that BNS 2023 Section 23 is not misapplied, while still upholding justice for genuinely incapacitated individuals.

Section 23 BNS Landmark Cases

The following landmark cases under IPC remain instructive for interpreting Section 23 BNS:

Basdev v. State of Pepsu (1956)

The Supreme Court held that mere drunkenness doesn’t excuse criminal behavior unless it leads to total mental incapacity.

Jethu Ram v. State of MP (1960)

The court clarified that even if someone drinks under pressure, it’s not involuntary if they understood the consequences.

Director of Public Prosecutions v. Beard (1920, UK Case)

A foundational judgment stating that intoxication may be a defense if it prevents forming the specific intent required by law.

Bablu alias Mubarik Hussain v. State of Rajasthan (2007)

The Supreme Court stressed that even when intoxicated, if the act appears deliberate, the defense does not apply.

Chet Ram v. State (1971)

It was ruled that the burden of proving involuntary intoxication lies with the accused, and mere presence of alcohol is insufficient.

These cases have formed the basis for interpreting intoxication-related defenses and are expected to influence how Section 23 and 24 of BNS are judicially applied in the future.

Section 23 BNS Legal Impact 

The introduction of Section 23 BNS has created a crucial legal safeguard for individuals who lack intent due to involuntary intoxication . This ensures that people are not punished for actions over which they had no cognitive control.

It also reflects the principle that criminal liability must be based on intent, not just action. In this way, Section 23 of BNS Act furthers the cause of justice, making the law more compassionate and logical.

By maintaining a strict burden of proof on the accused, the law avoids becoming a loophole for habitual offenders. Instead, it reinforces the doctrine that accountability and mental awareness must coexist for a person to be legally punished.

In sum, the legal impact of Section 23 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is both significant and balanced, promoting a fair criminal justice system rooted in modern principles.

Conclusion 

Section 23 BNS marks a progressive and thoughtful inclusion in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It rightly acknowledges that criminal liability requires mental awareness and that people who are genuinely incapacitated due to involuntary intoxication should not be criminally prosecuted.

By differentiating clearly between voluntary and involuntary intoxication, the provision protects vulnerable individuals while preserving the integrity of the criminal justice system. It aligns perfectly with the philosophy that both a wrongful act (actus reus) and a guilty mind (mens rea) are necessary for legal culpability.

Moreover, its distinction from Section 24 of BNS, which covers voluntary intoxication, and its roots in Section 85 IPC, show that the law has evolved in a manner that balances modern understanding with judicial consistency.