● Retained in BNS
Consent does not count as valid consent under the Code if given out of fear or a known misconception, by someone unable to understand due to unsoundness of mind or intoxication, or by a person under 12 -- unchanged under BNS Section 28 from IPC 90.
Section 90 IPC provided that consent is not valid consent for the Code's consent-based exceptions if given under fear of injury or a misconception of fact known to the actor, given by a person unable to understand its nature and consequence due to unsoundness of mind or intoxication, or given by a person under 12 (unless the context indicates otherwise).
BNS Section 28 reproduces the three limbs unchanged, restructured into lettered sub-clauses (a)/(b)/(c), with "Code" updated to "Sanhita" throughout the Act as a general terminology change.
Nothing substantive changed -- a pure renumbering from IPC 90 to BNS 28 with cosmetic restructuring.
This is a definitional provision narrowing what counts as valid consent; it operates to disqualify a purported consent (and so remove the consent-based defence) where it was obtained under fear, misconception, incapacity, or from a child under 12.
Summaries are for general information and are not legal advice. For the authoritative bare-act text, see the official Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Indian Penal Code, 1860 (full amended text, as it stood before repeal) on India Code, or the Ministry of Home Affairs' new criminal laws page. ← All comparisons