Section 96

The right of private defence exists because the law recognizes that state protection (police, courts) cannot always reach a person at the exact moment of danger. Drawing on long-standing legal traditions, the Indian Penal Code (drafted under Lord Macaulay in 1860) allows ordinary citizens a limited right to protect their own body and property, and that of others, when there is no time to seek help from public authorities. Section 96 is the opening declaration of this right, with later sections (97-106) defining its limits and conditions.

Indian courts have consistently held that Section 96 must be read together with Sections 97 to 106, which explain when the right arises and how far it extends. The Supreme Court, in cases such as Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab (2010), clarified that the right of private defence is not a right to retaliate or take revenge, but a right to repel imminent danger, and that the force used must be proportionate to the threat. Courts have repeatedly emphasized that this right is available even to an aggressor's original victim, but it does not extend to situations where the danger has already passed or where the person had time to seek help from public authorities.

• Myth: Section 96 lets you do anything you want if you say it was 'self-defence'.
  Fact: Courts require that the danger be real and immediate, and that the force used be reasonable and proportionate; Sections 97-106 set out these limits in detail.
• Myth: Private defence includes revenge after the attacker has fled or the threat has ended.
  Fact: Courts have held that the right ends once the danger is over; using force afterward is treated as a separate, punishable act, not private defence.