A general exception under Section 24 BNS under which a person who acts in good faith under a mistaken belief of fact (not of law) is not criminally liable if the act would have been lawful had the facts been as believed.
Explanation
Section 24 BNS 2023 (formerly Section 79 IPC) provides that nothing is an offence done by a person who, by reason of a mistake of fact (in good faith), believes they are justified by law in doing it, even though they are not. The Latin maxim is 'ignorantia facti excusat' — ignorance of fact excuses. Key elements: (a) the act must be done in good faith; (b) the belief must be as to a fact (not as to a legal rule); (c) if the facts had been as believed, the act would have been lawful. Classic example: a police officer arrests a person genuinely believing them to be a fugitive wanted for murder, but the person turns out to be an innocent lookalike — the officer is not guilty of wrongful restraint.
Statutory Provision
Section 24, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (formerly Section 79 IPC): 'Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing it.' Section 2(12) BNS defines 'good faith': 'A thing is said to be done in good faith where it is done with due care and attention; and, a thing said to be believed in good faith if it is believed with due care and attention.'
An incorrect belief about a legal rule or the legal consequences of an act — generally not a defence in criminal law, since every person is presumed to know the law.
Explanation
The maxim 'ignorantia juris non excusat' (ignorance of law is no excuse) is a foundational principle of criminal law. Everyone is presumed to know the law of the land — this fiction is necessary for the legal system to function; if ignorance of law were a defence, every accused would simply claim not to have known that their act was illegal. The BNS does not provide a 'mistake of law' general exception. However, courts have recognised limited exceptions: (a) where the act was done in good faith based on advice from a legal expert and the law was genuinely uncertain; (b) where the legal rule was recent and had not been publicised; and (c) in regulatory offences where the accused relied in good faith on a regulatory permission that later turned out to be invalid.
Statutory Provision
No provision in BNS 2023 establishing a 'mistake of law' defence — its absence is deliberate. Section 24 BNS (formerly Section 79 IPC) expressly restricts the defence to 'mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law.' This statutory exclusion codifies the common law maxim 'ignorantia juris non excusat.'
A Bill that deals exclusively with matters specified in Article 110(1) of the Constitution — such as imposition, abolition, or variation of taxes, custody of the Consolidated Fund, and borrowing — which can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha.
Explanation
A money bill under Article 110 is one that contains only provisions relating to: (a) imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax; (b) regulation of borrowing by the Government of India; (c) custody of the Consolidated Fund or Contingency Fund; (d) appropriation of money out of the Consolidated Fund; (e) declaration of any expenditure to be expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund; (f) receipt of money on account of the Consolidated Fund or the public account; and (g) any matter incidental to any of these. A money bill can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha, certified as such by the Speaker, and the Rajya Sabha can only recommend amendments (not reject or amend). The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery) Act controversy in 2018 raised questions about misuse of money bill certification.
Statutory Provision
Article 110(1), Constitution of India: 'A Bill shall be deemed to be a Money Bill if it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following matters, namely:— (a) the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax; (b) the regulation of the borrowing of money or the giving of any guarantee by the Government of India...'
A temporary stay on all legal proceedings, enforcement actions, and asset transfers against a corporate debtor — automatically imposed under Section 14 of the IBC from the date of commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
Explanation
The IBC moratorium under Section 14 is a comprehensive stay: (a) prohibition on institution or continuation of suits/proceedings against the corporate debtor; (b) prohibition on transferring, encumbering, or disposing of assets; (c) prohibition on enforcing security interests; (d) prohibition on recovery of property in possession of the corporate debtor; (e) prohibition on sale/transfer of the corporate debtor's legal rights; and (f) supply of essential goods and services cannot be terminated. The moratorium lasts for the duration of the CIRP — typically 180 days (extendable to 330 days). Purpose: to provide a 'clean slate' for the resolution professional to run the business as a going concern and develop a resolution plan without the distraction of creditor actions.
Statutory Provision
Section 14(1), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: 'Subject to provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), on the insolvency commencement date, the Adjudicating Authority shall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting — (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the SARFAESI Act; (d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor.'
The reason or inducement that causes a person to do an act — relevant in criminal and civil proceedings as evidence of state of mind, but proof of motive is not essential for conviction in most offences (unlike intention, which is an element of most offences).
Explanation
Section 8 BSA 2023 (formerly Section 8 IEA) makes motive relevant in two ways: (a) any fact is relevant that shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact; and (b) any fact that is the effect of any such act is relevant. Motive differs from intention: intention is the mental element of an offence (e.g., in murder, the intention to cause death or grievous hurt likely to cause death); motive is the underlying reason why the person formed that intention (e.g., greed, jealousy, revenge). Motive is relevant but not essential — a person may be convicted even if motive is not proved; conversely, proof of motive does not substitute for proof of the offence itself.
Statutory Provision
Section 8, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 (formerly Section 8 IEA): 'Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact. The conduct of any party, or of any agent to any party, to any suit or proceeding, in reference to such suit or proceeding, or in reference to any fact in issue therein or relevant thereto, and the conduct of any person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding, is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto.'
Property of any description that is not immovable, including corporeal objects capable of being moved from one place to another—as defined under the BNS 2023 and the General Clauses Act.
Explanation
Movable property under Section 2(21) of the BNS 2023 (formerly IPC Section 22) encompasses 'corporeal property of every description except land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth.' The General Clauses Act, 1897 Section 3(36) similarly defines it. Movable property is the subject matter of theft (which requires moving property from another's possession), embezzlement, and various property offences. Unlike immovable property, movable property can be transferred by physical delivery without registration.
Statutory Provision
Section 2(21), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: 'Movable property includes corporeal property of every description, except land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth.'
