What is IPC Section 87?
IPC Section 87 falls within Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code ("General Exceptions"), and is the first of a small cluster of provisions (Sections 87 to 92) that deal with consent as a factor affecting criminal liability. The underlying principle is straightforward: the law generally respects a person's right to consent to risks affecting their own body, and does not treat every resulting harm as criminal simply because harm occurred.
Section 87 draws the boundary of this principle carefully. It protects acts that are not intended, and not known by the doer, to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt — nothing in this section can excuse an act that was intended, or known to be likely, to cause death or grievous hurt, however clearly the other person consented. Within that boundary, the protection is broad: it covers harm the doer intended to cause (with consent), and harm the doer merely knew was a possible risk that the other person agreed to take on.
Important Update: IPC to BNS Transition
With effect from 1 July 2024, the Indian Penal Code has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 for offences committed on or after that date. Section 87 IPC now corresponds to Section 25 of the BNS, which carries forward the identical rule and the bare-act illustration without substantive change.
Legal Provision — Text of Section 87 IPC
Illustration: A and Z agree to fence with each other for amusement. This agreement implies the consent of each to suffer any harm which, in the course of such fencing, may be caused without foul play; and if A, while playing fairly, hurts Z, A commits no offence.
Sections 87, 88 and 90 — Consent and Its Limits
Consent to harm short of death or grievous hurt
Covers ordinary consensual activities involving a risk of harm — sports, games, and similar activities — but never excuses an act intended or known to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt.
Consent for the person's own benefit, even with a risk of death
A separate, broader provision covering acts done in good faith for a person's benefit — such as a surgical operation — with their consent, even where death is a known risk (though not intended), provided the act is not intended to cause death.
What does NOT count as valid consent
Clarifies that consent given under fear of injury or a misconception of fact, or by a person of unsound mind or intoxicated person unable to understand the nature of what they are consenting to, or by a child under twelve, is not "consent" within the meaning of these sections at all.
Reading these together: Section 87 is the general consent provision for ordinary risk-taking activities; Section 88 extends further for good-faith medical and similar treatment; and Section 90 makes clear that not every apparent "yes" counts as legally valid consent for any of these purposes.
How Section 87 Affects Criminal Liability
| Nature | A general exception providing a defence — not a substantive offence, so it carries no punishment, cognizability, or bail classification of its own |
|---|---|
| Effect | Where genuinely established, the harm caused is not an offence at all |
| Absolute Limit | Never extends to an act intended, or known by the doer to be likely, to cause death or grievous hurt — this limit cannot be waived by any degree of consent |
| Age Requirement | The person consenting must be above 18 years of age; consent given by anyone younger does not attract this section |
Because Section 87 is a complete defence rather than a substantive offence, disputes typically centre on whether its narrow conditions are actually satisfied — particularly whether genuine, informed consent existed, whether the harm stayed within the "short of death or grievous hurt" limit, and whether the doer's own intent or knowledge crossed that line.
Key Ingredients of Section 87
The act must not be intended to cause death or grievous hurt
If the doer actually intended such harm, Section 87 does not apply, regardless of any consent given.
The act must not be known by the doer to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt
Even without intent, if the doer knew death or grievous hurt was a likely consequence, the exception does not apply.
The person suffering harm must be above eighteen years of age
Consent given by, or on behalf of, someone younger does not satisfy this section.
That person must have given consent, express or implied
Either to suffer the specific harm caused, or to take the risk of harm the doer knew was a possibility.
If You Are Involved on Either Side of a Section 87 Situation
Section 87 disputes typically arise from injuries in sports, games, or other consensual activities, where the question becomes whether genuine consent existed and whether the harm remained within the section's narrow limits. What matters depends on which side of that dispute you are on.
If You Were Harmed and Are Disputing Consent
- Establish whether you actually gave consent, express or implied, and to what specific activity or risk.
- If the harm went beyond what you consented to — for instance, through foul play in a game, rather than harm arising fairly within its rules — this is central to showing Section 87 does not apply.
- Gather evidence of whether the other person intended, or knew it was likely, that their act would cause death or grievous hurt, since this takes the matter outside Section 87 entirely.
- Consult a lawyer to assess whether Section 90's rules on invalid consent (fear, misconception, unsoundness of mind, or age under 12) are relevant to your situation.
If You Are Relying on Section 87 as a Defence
- Establish that the other person genuinely consented, expressly or impliedly, to the activity and its inherent risks.
- Show that you did not intend, and had no knowledge that it was likely, that your act would cause death or grievous hurt.
- Where the activity has established rules (such as a sport), show that the harm arose from fair conduct within those rules, not from conduct exceeding what was consented to.
- Consult a criminal lawyer promptly if you are facing any allegation arising from a consensual activity that resulted in harm.
Consent Within the Rules vs. Conduct Exceeding Them
A recurring issue in Section 87 disputes is whether harm arose from conduct genuinely within the scope of what was consented to. The bare-act illustration makes this explicit: fencing "without foul play" is covered, but conduct exceeding fair play in the same activity would not automatically be. Consent to an activity is not unlimited consent to anything that might happen during it.
How This Defence Is Typically Examined
A Consensual Activity Results in Harm
Harm occurs during an activity the parties had agreed to — such as a sport, game, or similar activity carrying an inherent risk.
A Complaint or FIR Is Registered
Where the harm is significant, a complaint may be made regarding the resulting injury.
Investigation Into Consent and Intent/Knowledge
The Investigating Officer examines whether genuine consent existed, its scope, the age of the person harmed, and whether the alleged offender intended or knew the act was likely to cause death or grievous hurt.
Section 87 Raised as a Defence
If charged, the accused raises Section 87, and the court examines whether all its conditions — no intent or knowledge of likely death/grievous hurt, the age of the consenting party, and the scope of consent — are genuinely satisfied.
Outcome
If Section 87's conditions are established, the act is not an offence. If the harm exceeded the scope of consent, or crossed into death or grievous hurt intended or known to be likely, the exception does not apply, and liability is assessed under the ordinary law.
Judicial Interpretation of Section 87
Courts have examined the scope of consent under Section 87 in various contexts, including its invocation in wider public debate about consensual conduct between adults. This is general legal information for awareness — always have a lawyer verify how these principles apply to your specific facts.
Consent Must Be Genuine and Within Scope
Courts have held that the consent Section 87 requires must be real and freely given, and must cover the specific harm or risk that actually resulted — consent to participate in an activity generally is not the same as consent to any and all conduct that might occur during it, particularly conduct that exceeds the fair or ordinary bounds of that activity.
Section 87 Invoked in Constitutional Litigation on Consensual Conduct
In written submissions filed in significant constitutional litigation concerning consensual conduct between adults, it has been argued that Section 87's consent-based protection extends to harm that is neither intended nor known to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt, and that this principle of respecting consensual risk-taking between adults runs through the Code more broadly. Such submissions reflect how Section 87's underlying rationale — that consenting adults may accept certain risks to themselves — has been argued to apply well beyond sports and games.