Law and You > Criminal Laws > Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 > Intentional Insult with Intent to Provoke Breach of the Peace (S. 352 BNS)
Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 deals with the offence of intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace. This provision criminalizes acts where a person deliberately insults another, knowing or intending that such provocation is likely to cause the other person to break public peace or commit an offence. The law recognizes that words, gestures, or conduct, though not physically violent, can incite disorder and disturb societal harmony.
The objective of Section 352 BNS is to maintain public order and social tranquility by penalizing conduct that is calculated to provoke violence or unlawful reactions. It emphasizes not merely the insult itself but the intention behind it—that is, the likelihood of provoking a breach of peace. Thus, the section serves as a preventive measure against escalation of conflicts arising from deliberate provocation.
By addressing intentional insults that may lead to public disorder, Section 352 reinforces the principle that freedom of expression does not extend to conduct aimed at inciting violence or disturbing peace.
Intentional Insult with Intent to Provoke Breach of the Peace:
Section 352 BNS:
Intentional Insult with Intent to Provoke Breach of the Peace:
Whoever intentionally insults in any manner, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Essential Ingredients of Section 352 BNS:
- That the accused has intentionally insulted some person in any manner; and
- That the insult is such as to give provocation to the person insulted; and
- That the accused has either intended or known that such provocation would cause the person insulted to break the public peace or to commit an offence.
Examples:
- A, during a crowded market dispute, shouts abusive and insulting words at B, saying,
“If you are brave, hit me now!” If A intends to provoke B into fighting and causing public disorder, it falls under Section 352 BNS. - A deliberately insults B’s mother in public, knowing B is short-tempered and likely to react violently. If the insult is made with intention to provoke breach of peace, the offence is attracted.
- A intentionally mocks B’s religious beliefs in an aggressive manner during a heated gathering, aiming to trigger violence. If the act is likely to cause public disorder and is done with such intention, Section 352 applies.
- A insults a colleague in front of others, saying, “You are a fraud and I dare you to attack me.” If done to provoke a violent response, it may amount to the offence.
- A makes an offensive hand gesture at B in a tense protest situation to incite a fight. Gestures intended to provoke violence are also covered.
Punishment:
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Nature of Offence:
The offence is Non-cognizable, Bailable, Compoundable by the person insulted, Triable by any Magistrate.
Judicial Analysis:
In Kunti Kumari v. State of Jharkhand, Criminal Appeal No. 791 of 2010 case, where the complainant, who was the President of the village education committee, had organized a budget meeting in which the appellant was present. The complainant was handing out meal packets to the members for lunch. When she was handing the meal packet to the appellant, the appellant snatched the packet out of her hand and started abusing her with respect to her community, uttering disrespectful statements against his case, and saying that even a dog would not eat the food she serves. The appellant had abused her in front of all the teachers and trainees, which had caused her mental harassment. The Jharkhand High Court convicted the appellant and punished with four months of simple imprisonment under Section 504 of the IPC (S. 352 BNS).
In Fiona Shrikhandhe v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2014 SC 957 case, where the accused had moved in with her husband to a flat in Mumbai that belonged to the husband and her brother-in-law. There were internal family tussles regarding claims over the property, and the accused was indulging in several unlawful activities in order to force her brother-in-law and his wife out of the flat. The accused tried to prevent the entry of the family members into the puja room and would shout and yell at them. She had tried to move the “devara” (an arrangement where the idols of the deities are placed) out of the flat, and in that attempt, she damaged and dislodged the picture frames and the idols. These activities had hurt the religious sentiments of the complainant and caused her anguish. The High Court of Bombay laid down the essential elements of Section 504 IPC (S. 352 BNS) in this case as follows:
- Intentional insult.
- The insult must be such as to give provocation to the person insulted.
- The accused must have the intention or knowledge that the provocation will cause another to break public peace or commit any other offence.
The Court held that one of the essential elements is the act of intentional insult, which leads to a breach of public peace, and that merely abusing the complainant is not sufficient to convict the plaintiff under Section 504 of the IPC (S. 352 BNS).
In Kishori Mohan v. Dwarika Nath Singh (May 8, 1974) case, the complainant, Kanhaiya Lal, was the head assistant-cum accountant of a Gharka Block, and the petitioners, Kishori Lal and Dwarika Nath, were, at the time of the incident, the junior statistical supervisor and panchayat sewak of the block, respectively. During a non-gazetted employees’ strike, the complainant came out for some work. At this time, he was suddenly surrounded by the staff, and Dwarika Nath humiliated him in front of them by making him wear a garland of shoes, and Kishori Nath took a picture of him. The magistrate had convicted both petitioners under Section 504 IPC (S. 352 BNS) and charged them both with six months of rigorous imprisonment. The appellate court, however, after the revision of the judgement, set aside Kishori Lal’s charges. The Patna High Court referred to the case of Gauri Shankar v. Bachha Singh (1938) and held that there was no evidence of publication or brandishing of the photographs. Thus, simply taking photos can neither be held as an undignified conduct nor does it lead to provocation to break public peace.
Conclusion:
Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 plays an important role in preserving public order and social harmony by penalizing intentional insults that are likely to provoke a breach of peace. The provision recognizes that words, gestures, or conduct—though not physically violent in themselves—can escalate tensions and lead to disorder if made with deliberate intent to incite aggression.
By focusing on the element of intention and the likelihood of provoking violence, the section strikes a careful balance between protecting freedom of expression and preventing misuse of speech to disturb public tranquility. It ensures that the law intervenes not in cases of mere rudeness or casual quarrels, but where there is a conscious attempt to trigger unlawful reactions.
Ultimately, Section 352 BNS reinforces the principle that maintaining peace and mutual respect in society is a shared responsibility, and that deliberate provocation designed to disrupt harmony will attract legal consequences.
For More Articles on the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Click Here