Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Section 37 – Acts against which there is no right of private defence

(1) There is no right of private defence, —

(a) against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that act, may not be strictly justifiable by law;

(b) against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that direction may not be strictly justifiable by law;

(c) in cases in which there is time to have recourse to the protection of the public authorities.

(2) The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence.

Explanation 1.—A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an act done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant, as such, unless he knows or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act is such public servant.

Explanation 2.—A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an act done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant, unless he knows, or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act is acting by such direction, or unless such person states the authority under which he acts, or if he has authority in writing, unless he produces such authority, if demanded.

Simplified Explanation

Section 37 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), titled “Acts Against Which There is No Right of Private Defence,” outlines certain situations where the right to private defense does not apply. This section clarifies that there are specific circumstances in which individuals are not legally permitted to use force in self-defense or the defense of property, as these situations do not warrant such actions under the law.

Key Points of Section 37

1. Limitations on Private Defense:
   • Section 37 establishes that the right of private defense is not unlimited and specifies situations where it is restricted. This ensures that the right to private defense is used responsibly and not as a means to justify unnecessary or excessive force.
2. Acts by Lawful Authority:
   • The right to private defense cannot be exercised against acts done by individuals acting under lawful authority. For example, actions by police officers, government officials, or other authorized personnel performing their legal duties do not provide grounds for private defense. If a law enforcement officer makes an arrest or seizes property within their lawful power, self-defense cannot be claimed against such actions.
3. Acts Without Immediate Threat to Life or Safety:
   • Private defense is not justified if there is no immediate danger to life or safety. For instance, if the act does not present a real, immediate threat, defensive actions are not protected. This applies when the danger is not imminent, or there is an opportunity to seek assistance or use non-violent measures.
4. Restrictions in Cases of Public Servants:
   • Section 37 generally prohibits using the right to private defense against acts done in good faith by public servants in the discharge of their duties. Public servants are legally protected when performing lawful actions, and individuals are expected to respect their authority without resorting to defensive force unless there is an abuse of power.
5. Situations of No Justified Defense:
   • The section specifically rules out defensive actions in situations where there is an alternative, non-violent course of action, such as compliance or retreat. The law encourages individuals to avoid confrontations when possible, reserving private defense for situations where there is no other reasonable way to prevent harm.
6. Exclusions to Avoid Misuse:
   • Section 37 prevents misuse of the right to private defense, ensuring it is not used to justify aggressive or retaliatory behavior in situations where there is no legitimate threat. This maintains a balanced approach, protecting individuals’ rights while upholding respect for lawful authority and social order.
7. Examples of Prohibited Defense:
   • If a tax officer lawfully confiscates property under an authorized order, the property owner cannot claim private defense against the officer. Similarly, if a person believes they are unfairly treated by a public servant following legal protocols, they are not justified in using force under the pretext of private defense.

Purpose of Section 37

The purpose of Section 37 is to define the boundaries of the right to private defense, ensuring that it is used only in legitimate situations of immediate, unlawful threat. By excluding acts done under lawful authority or without immediate danger, this section upholds the principle that self-defense is a protective measure, not a means to resist lawful acts or justify unnecessary aggression. Section 37 promotes responsible use of the right to private defense, balancing individual rights with respect for public servants and legal processes. It encourages a fair and orderly approach, reserving defensive actions for genuine cases of imminent threat to life, safety, or property.