BNS Section 30 — Act done in good faith for benefit of a person without consent

Summary

The main rule of this section is that an act is not an offence merely because it causes harm to a person, if the act is done in good faith for that person's benefit, and it is done without that person's consent. This applies only when the circumstances make it impossible for that person to give consent, or when that person is incapable of giving consent and has no guardian or other person lawfully in charge of them from whom consent could be obtained in time for the act to still be beneficial.

The proviso lists four situations where this protection does not apply. Under clause (a), the exception does not cover the intentional causing of death, or the attempting to cause death. Under clause (b), it does not cover doing anything that the person knows is likely to cause death, unless the purpose is to prevent death or grievous hurt, or to cure a grievous disease or infirmity. Under clause (c), it does not cover the voluntary causing of hurt, or the attempting to cause hurt, unless the purpose is to prevent death or hurt. Under clause (d), it does not cover the abetment of any offence, if the exception itself would not extend to the committing of that offence.

The illustrations give examples of when this protection applies. Illustration (1): Z is thrown from a horse and is insensible. A, a surgeon, finds Z needs trepanning and performs it in good faith for Z's benefit before Z can judge for himself, without intending Z's death. A has committed no offence. Illustration (2): Z is carried off by a tiger. A fires at the tiger, knowing the shot may kill Z but not intending to kill Z, and in good faith intending Z's benefit. The bullet mortally wounds Z. A has committed no offence. Illustration (3): A, a surgeon, sees a child with a fatal injury needing an immediate operation. There is no time to contact the child's guardian, and A performs the operation despite the child's entreaties, in good faith intending the child's benefit. A has committed no offence. Illustration (4): A is in a burning house with Z, a child. People below hold out a blanket. A drops the child from the rooftop, knowing the fall may kill the child but not intending to kill the child, and in good faith intending the child's benefit. Even if the child is killed by the fall, A has committed no offence.

The explanation clarifies that mere pecuniary benefit, meaning financial or monetary gain, is not considered benefit within the meaning of sections 26, 27, and this section.

Official Text

Nothing is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause to a person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, even without that person’s consent, if the circumstances are such that it is impossible for that person to signify consent, or if that person is incapable of giving consent, and has no guardian or other person in lawful charge of him from whom it is possible to obtain consent in time for the thing to be done with benefit:

Provided that this exception shall not extend to—

(a) the intentional causing of death, or the attempting to cause death;

(b) the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely to cause death, for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity;

(c) the voluntary causing of hurt, or to the attempting to cause hurt, for any purpose other than the preventing of death or hurt;

(d) the abetment of any offence, to the committing of which offence it would not extend.

Illustrations.

(1) Z is thrown from his horse, and is insensible. A, a surgeon, finds that Z requires to be trepanned. A, not intending Z’s death, but in good faith, for Z’s benefit, performs the trepan before Z recovers his power of judging for himself. A has committed no offence.

(2) Z is carried off by a tiger. A fires at the tiger knowing it to be likely that the shot may kill Z, but not intending to kill Z, and in good faith intending Z’s benefit. A’s bullet gives Z a mortal wound. A has committed no offence.

(3) A, a surgeon, sees a child suffer an accident which is likely to prove fatal unless an operation be immediately performed. There is no time to apply to the child’s guardian. A performs the operation in spite of the entreaties of the child, intending, in good faith, the child’s benefit. A has committed no offence.

(4) A is in a house which is on fire, with Z, a child. People below hold out a blanket. A drops the child from the house top, knowing it to be likely that the fall may kill the child, but not intending to kill the child, and intending, in good faith, the child’s benefit. Here, even if the child is killed by the fall, A has committed no offence.

Explanation.—Mere pecuniary benefit is not benefit within the meaning of sections 26, 27 and this section.

Related Judgments

• SC (2025) Vol.3 p.1309 — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• SC (2025) Vol.11 p.291 — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• SC (2025) Vol.6 p.280 — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• SC (2024) Vol.11 p.876 — Supreme Court of India (2024)
• SC (2025) Vol.3 p.1531 — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• SC (2024) Vol.8 p.670 — Supreme Court of India (2024)
• SC (2025) Vol.2 p.80 — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• SC (2025) Vol.4 p.2730 — Supreme Court of India (2025)

Old <-> New Code Mapping

• IPC §92 — Act done in good faith for benefit of a person without consent