Public Guidance · Faridabad · Criminal Law

Marpit / Hurt Case Under BNS — Section 115, Section 117, and What Follows the FIR

Last updated: 31 July 2026 · By Advocate Manish Sharma, Faridabad · General legal information, not legal advice

In short: A scuffle or beating — the everyday marpit case — is prosecuted under the hurt provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Voluntarily causing hurt (Section 115(2) BNS) carries imprisonment up to one year and/or fine up to ₹10,000, and is bailable and compoundable. Grievous hurt (Section 117(2)) — fractures, disfigurement, injuries specified in Section 116 — carries up to seven years and changes the case’s entire complexion. Which section applies is decided less by anyone’s narrative and more by the MLC (medico-legal certificate) prepared at the hospital. Marpit matters also produce cross-FIRs more than any other category, so the first days after the incident usually decide the next two years.

Which section applies — 115 or 117? The MLC decides

The dividing line in every hurt case is medical, not verbal. Simple hurt keeps the matter in Section 115 territory — bailable, magistrate-triable, compoundable. The moment the MLC records a fracture, dislocation, dangerous injury, or any category listed in Section 116, the case moves to Section 117 grievous hurt, and if a weapon or dangerous means was used, Section 118 adds its own aggravation. Related sections often ride along on the same FIR: wrongful restraint (Section 126), criminal intimidation (Section 351), and intentional insult to provoke breach of the peace (Section 352).

This is why the single most consequential document in a marpit file is a prompt, accurate MLC — for both sides.

Complainant lens — the first 48 hours

If you have been beaten: medical examination first, at a government hospital where possible, so the MLC is contemporaneous — a certificate obtained days later invites the argument that injuries came from elsewhere. Then the FIR, with a clean chronology and named witnesses; CCTV from the spot should be requested for preservation immediately, because commercial DVRs overwrite in days. If the police drag their feet on registration, the FIR escalation remedies and the Zero-FIR route exist precisely for this situation.

Accused lens — when the FIR names you

A hurt FIR against you is serious but structured. Under Section 115(2) the offence is bailable — release on bail is a right, exercised at the police station or before the Magistrate. If Sections 117 or 118 have been added, bail becomes a judicial decision and, where arrest is apprehended, anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS is the protective step — the mechanics are covered in the bail procedure guide.

If you were injured in the same incident, your own MLC and a promptly filed cross-version are not optional — silence in the first week is routinely read against the party who stayed silent.

Cross-FIRs — when both sides have filed

Cross-FIRs are the signature of marpit litigation: both versions are investigated, often by direction of senior officers, and frequently both are charge-sheeted and tried together so one court sees the whole incident. In that contest, the side with the earlier medical examination, the more coherent timeline, and the preserved electronic record usually holds the stronger ground — which is why the quality of work done in week one matters more than anything argued in year two.

Settlement — how these cases lawfully end

Most simple-hurt matters end in compromise, and the law is designed for it: Section 115(2) is compoundable by the injured person, and courts — including Lok Adalat benches — record such compromises routinely. Where the FIR carries a non-compoundable aggravation but the dispute is genuinely private and settled, High Courts can quash proceedings on compromise under Section 528 BNSS. The craft lies in settling in a manner that actually closes every strand of the case, including any cross-FIR, rather than leaving one limb alive.

Frequently asked questions

Marpit ke case me kitni saza hoti hai?

Simple hurt (Section 115(2) BNS) me ek saal tak ki saza aur/ya ₹10,000 tak jurmana — bailable aur compoundable. Agar MLC me fracture ya Section 116 wali koi injury hai to grievous hurt (Section 117(2)) lagta hai, jisme saza saat saal tak ho sakti hai.

Is Section 115(2) BNS bailable?

Yes — simple hurt is bailable and release on bail is a matter of right. If grievous hurt (117) or dangerous-weapons (118) provisions are added to the FIR, bail becomes a court decision, and anticipatory bail may be the appropriate protective step.

Kya marpit ka case wapas liya ja sakta hai?

Simple hurt compoundable hai — injured person court ki record par compromise kar ke case khatam kar sakta hai; Lok Adalat me bhi ye matters settle hote hain. Non-compoundable dhara judi ho to genuine settlement par High Court se Section 528 BNSS me quashing ka raasta hota hai.

The other side filed their FIR first — does that finish my case?

No. A cross-version filed promptly, supported by your own MLC, is investigated on its own strength, and cross-cases are often tried together. What genuinely hurts is delay — a counter-version surfacing weeks later is viewed with suspicion.

How important is the MLC really?

It is usually the decisive document. It fixes the injuries in time, determines whether the case is simple or grievous hurt, and anchors both prosecution and defence. A prompt government-hospital MLC is worth more than any number of witnesses recalled months later.