Back to Penal Code 1871

Section history

Section 84 — Act of person of unsound mind

Consolidated view is experimental and may be broken for certain provisions.

Amendments
Section 84 — Original text to 1 January 2020superseded
84.Act of a person of unsound mind

Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.

[Indian PC 1860, s. 84]

Section 84 — From 1 January 2020 (current)rewritten by Criminal Law Reform Act 2019
84.Act of person of unsound mind

Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is —

(a)incapable of knowing the nature of the act;

(b)incapable of knowing that what he is doing is wrong (whether wrong by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest persons or wrong as contrary to law); or

(c)completely deprived of any power to control his actions.

Illustration

A, while labouring under a delusion, believes that he has received divine instructions to kill Z and that it is morally right for him to do so. A however knows that it is contrary to law to kill Z. A kills Z. Here, the defence of unsoundness of mind is not available to A as he is capable of knowing that it is contrary to law to kill Z.

(1)Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is —

(a)incapable of knowing the nature of the act;

(b)incapable of knowing that what he is doing is wrong; or

(c)completely deprived of any power to control his actions.

(2)Subsection (1)(b) applies only if the person is incapable of knowing that his act —

(a)is wrong by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest persons; and

(b)is wrong as contrary to law.

Illustration

A, while labouring under a delusion, believes that he has received divine instructions to kill Z and that it is morally right for him to do so. A however knows that it is contrary to law to kill Z. A kills Z. Here, the defence of unsoundness of mind is not available to A as he is capable of knowing that it is contrary to law to kill Z.