Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Section 106
Causing death by negligence
(1) Whoever causes death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if such act is done by a registered medical practitioner while performing medical procedure, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, “registered medical practitioner” means a medical practitioner who possesses any medical qualification recognised under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (30 of 2019) and whose name has been entered in the National Medical Register or a State Medical Register under that Act.
(2) Whoever causes death of any person by rash and negligent driving of vehicle not amounting to culpable homicide, and escapes without reporting it to a police officer or a Magistrate soon after the incident, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description of a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Why this exists
This provision replaces Section 304A of the old Indian Penal Code, which for over a century covered deaths caused by carelessness rather than intention — like a doctor's slip, a builder's shortcut, or a driver's rash turn. Courts had long complained that treating negligent doctors the same as reckless killers was unfair, especially after the Supreme Court's Jacob Mathew judgment (2005) called for protecting doctors from harassment while still holding them accountable. The new law responds by carving out a lighter punishment for registered medical practitioners acting during treatment. Separately, India has struggled with a 'hit-and-run' problem — drivers fleeing accident scenes to avoid liability — so lawmakers added a much tougher penalty for drivers who cause death and abscond without reporting, aiming to encourage people to stop and help rather than flee.
How courts read it
Under the old Section 304A, courts consistently held that 'rash or negligent act' requires a direct, proximate link between the act and the death — mere carelessness in the abstract is not enough (as in cases like Suleman Rahiman Mulani v. State of Maharashtra). For doctors, the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) held that medical negligence must be judged by professional standards, not ordinary carelessness, and requires prior expert opinion before prosecution — a concern the new lower punishment for registered medical practitioners appears to reflect. The hit-and-run clause in sub-section (2) is new territory; it was introduced (and briefly withdrawn after transporter protests in January 2024 before being reinstated) specifically to penalise drivers who escape scrutiny, and courts will likely develop fresh precedent on what counts as 'escaping without reporting soon after the incident.'
Common misconceptions
- Myth: This section treats causing death by negligence the same as murder.
Fact: It specifically excludes acts that amount to culpable homicide (murder or its lesser forms); it only covers accidental, careless causing of death, with much lower punishment than homicide offences. - Myth: Doctors are completely immune from prosecution under this law.
Fact: Registered doctors are not immune — they can still be jailed up to 2 years and fined — but the law recognises their special situation with a lower maximum sentence than other negligence cases, only when death occurs during an actual medical procedure. - Myth: Any driver involved in a fatal accident automatically gets up to 10 years.
Fact: The 10-year punishment under sub-section (2) applies specifically to drivers who cause death by rash/negligent driving and then flee without reporting to police or a magistrate soon after; drivers who stay and report are dealt with differently.