सं Samvidhan

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 97

repealed

Right of private defence of the body and of property

Why this exists

The right of private defence exists because the law cannot guarantee instant police protection in every moment of danger. Drawing from long-standing legal traditions recognizing self-preservation as a natural right, the IPC's drafters (led by Lord Macaulay) built in Sections 96-106 to let ordinary people act immediately to prevent harm to themselves, others, or property when there is no time to seek help from authorities.

How courts read it

Indian courts, including the Supreme Court in cases like Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration (1968) and Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab (2010), have clarified that this right is defensive, not retaliatory — it ends once the threat ends, and the force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the danger faced. Courts have consistently held that the right cannot be used as a pretext for aggression or revenge, and that the burden of proving private defence, while resting on the accused, only requires raising a reasonable doubt rather than proof beyond doubt.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: Private defence means you can do whatever you want to someone who threatens you or your property.
    Fact: Courts have held that the force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat, and the right ends once the danger has passed — it cannot be used for revenge or excessive retaliation.
  • Myth: You can only defend your own body or property under this section.
    Fact: Section 97 explicitly allows you to defend the body and property of any other person, not just your own.