Section 33: Act Causing Slight Harm

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita • Chapter III: General Exceptions • Official Statutory Text & Legal Guide

Chapter III: General Exceptions
Trial Court
Complete Defence
Non-Applicable
Formerly Sec 95 IPC

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 33

Section 33 codifies the legal maxim 'De minimis non curat lex' (the law does not concern itself with trifles), establishing that nothing is an offence by reason that it causes, or that it is intended to cause, or that it is known to be likely to cause, any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person of ordinary sense and temper would complain of such harm.

  • Doctrine of Trifles: Prevents criminalization of minor daily frictions, accidental jostles in crowded buses, or trivial disputes among neighbors.
  • Ordinary Sense and Temper Test: Harm must be evaluated by the objective standard of a person of ordinary sense and temper, not an hypersensitive litigant.
  • Quashing & Discharge Mechanism: Primary statutory tool for High Courts and Magistrates to quash frivolous, malicious, and trivial FIRs.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Mrs. Veeda Menezes v. Yusuf Khan (AIR 1966 SC 1773): The Supreme Court held that Section 95 IPC (Section 33 BNS) applies to technical offences where the harm is so slight that public justice does not warrant criminal trial; throwing a file or accidental minor touching is covered under this exception.
  • Bindeshwari Prasad Singh v. Kali Singh (1977) 1 SCC 57: Affirmed that courts must not entertain frivolous complaints designed to harass neighbors over petty property boundaries.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When opposing counsel files an FIR under Section 115 BNS alleging simple assault because your client brushed past them during a society meeting, file a discharge application under Section 250 BNSS invoking Section 33 BNS: the alleged harm is a non-actionable trifle.