Bodily injury in Romania (Art. 194) explained

1. Why bodily injury is such a “high-stakes” charge

In Romanian criminal law, bodily injury (vătămare corporală) under Article 194 Criminal Code is not just “a heavier beating”. It is a threshold offence: once the case crosses into Art. 194 territory, the whole dynamic of the file changes.

Compared with battery and other acts of violence (Art. 193 Criminal Code):

penalties are significantly higher;
the main penalty is imprisonment only, not a fine;
in combination with domestic violence, robberies, unlawful deprivation of liberty or serious road traffic accidents, the case can become complex, with multiple defendants and very high compensation claims.

According to the official English translation of the Criminal Code published by the Venice Commission, Art. 194 punishes with 2–7 years’ imprisonment the act set out in Art. 193 that causes at least one of the following consequences: infirmity, injuries or health impairment requiring more than 90 days of medical care, serious and permanent aesthetic injury, abortion, or endangering a person’s life.(Comisia de la Veneția)

By contrast, Art. 193 punishes:

simple battery or other acts of violence causing physical suffering; and
acts that cause traumatic injuries or affect health, where the seriousness is assessed by up to 90 days of medical care.(Comisia de la Veneția)

On top of that, Law no. 116/2025 has recently increased the penalty ranges for Art. 193 and raised the daily-fine amounts, making even basic “battery” cases more serious than they used to be.(Portal Legislativ)

For a defendant, the practical difference between “battery” (Art. 193) and “bodily injury” (Art. 194) means:

different sentencing ranges;
different discussions about suspension or postponement of the sentence, plea bargaining and the more favourable law;
a very different risk profile when deciding strategy.

2. The legal framework in 2025: the core articles you actually see in files

2.1. The key Criminal Code provisions

Four provisions of the Romanian Criminal Code (Law no. 286/2009) form the backbone of bodily-injury cases:(Comisia de la Veneția)

Art. 193 – Battery and other acts of violence (“lovirea sau alte violențe”)
Art. 194 – Bodily injury (“vătămarea corporală”)
Art. 196 – Bodily injury by negligence (“vătămarea corporală din culpă”)
Art. 199 – Domestic violence (“violența în familie”)

Under the Venice Commission English version:

Art. 193 covers battery/violence causing physical suffering, and acts causing injuries or health impairment assessed by up to 90 days of medical care.(Comisia de la Veneția)
Art. 194 defines bodily injury as the Art. 193 act that caused at least one of the five serious consequences listed below, with a 2–7 year penalty in the basic form and 3–10 years where the perpetrator acted with the purpose of causing certain consequences.(Comisia de la Veneția)
Art. 196 deals with bodily injury by negligence, including where the Art. 194 consequences occur without intent (for example, in traffic accidents), with penalties generally between 6 months and 2–3 years or a fine, depending on circumstances.(Comisia de la Veneția)
Art. 199 increases the maximum penalties by one quarter where the offence in Art. 193–195 is committed against a family member, and allows ex officio prosecution in some domestic-violence situations.(Comisia de la Veneția)

2.2. What changed recently: Law no. 116/2025 and Art. 193

Law no. 116/2025, published in the Official Gazette on 23 June 2025, amended Art. 193 as follows:(Portal Legislativ)

battery or other acts of violence causing physical suffering are now punishable from 6 months to 3 years of imprisonment or a fine;
acts causing injuries or affecting health, where seriousness is assessed by up to 90 days of medical care, are punishable from 1 to 5 years of imprisonment or a fine.

The same law also increased the range of a day-fine from 60 to 600 lei per day, with a total of 30–400 days, making financial penalties significantly heavier than under the previous regime.(Portal Legislativ)

This means that in 2025:

the “distance” between Art. 193 and Art. 194 in terms of penalties is smaller than before;
but crossing the line into Art. 194 still moves the case into a pure imprisonment zone, with higher maximums and often more restrictive judicial practice.

3. Where is the line between battery (Art. 193) and bodily injury (Art. 194)?

3.1. The 90-day threshold – a very precise line

The 90-day threshold is the most visible technical element used to distinguish between Art. 193 and Art. 194:

up to 90 days of medical care (including 90) → usually Art. 193 para. (2);
more than 90 days → potentially Art. 194 para. (1) b).(Comisia de la Veneția)

Romanian doctrine and forensic practice are consistent that “more than 90 days” means at least 91 days of medical care, not “around 90”.(Legislationline)

However, the 90-day rule is only one of the five alternative consequences listed in Art. 194. Even where the number of days is below 90, the case can still fall under Art. 194 if another consequence (such as an infirmity or serious aesthetic injury) is present.

3.2. It is not just about counting days

Art. 194 para. (1) lists five alternative outcomes, any of which is enough:(Comisia de la Veneția)

Infirmity
Traumatic injuries or health impairment requiring more than 90 days of medical care
Serious and permanent aesthetic injury
Abortion
Endangering a person’s life

This means:

a case with 60 days of medical care can still be Art. 194 if there is, for example, a serious and permanent aesthetic injury;
a case with 100 days of care can be Art. 194 even if the long recovery is due to complications rather than the initial trauma alone – as long as the causal link is established medico-legally.(Legislationline)

4. How “medical care days” are actually determined

4.1. Forensic medicine, not sick leave

For criminal-law purposes, “medical care days” are not the same as:

days of hospitalisation; or
days of sick leave granted by a family doctor.

They are determined by forensic medicine services (IML) based on:

clinical examinations;
hospital records and discharge notes;
imaging, surgical reports and other medical documents.

A forensic certificate (and, where needed, a forensic expert report) will state:

the injuries sustained;
the likely mechanism (consistent or not with the victim’s story);
and the number of days of medical care needed for healing.(rjor.ro)

If complications appear or the evolution is different from the initial prognosis, the parties can request a supplementary expert report, and the number of days may be adjusted – sometimes pushing the case across the 90-day line.(Facultatea de Drept)

4.2. Why a few days more or less can change everything

Typical practical scenarios:

80–85 days of care → the case is usually framed as battery with injuries (Art. 193 para. (2));
91–100 days → the same factual incident may be reframed as bodily injury (Art. 194);
91–100 days, but produced by negligence (for example, in a traffic accident) → bodily injury by negligence (Art. 196).(Comisia de la Veneția)

For the defendant, that difference can mean:

eligibility for a fine versus mandatory imprisonment;
a much higher maximum sentence;
a different risk when negotiating a plea agreement or when evaluating trial vs. settlement.(Strategii Manageriale)

5. The five Art. 194 consequences explained

5.1. Infirmity

The Criminal Code does not define “infirmity” in detail, but doctrine and practice usually include:(studia.law.ubbcluj.ro)

loss of an organ or of its function (e.g. loss of vision in one eye);
major neurological deficits, paralysis or irreversible sensory loss;
serious long-term psychiatric consequences directly caused by the violent act.

Forensic and judicial practice often treat “infirmity” as a permanent or long-term functional deficit, going beyond scars or temporary limitations.

5.2. Injuries requiring more than 90 days of medical care

This is the most frequently discussed form of bodily injury:

injuries or health impairment for which healing requires more than 90 days of medical care, according to forensic experts.(Comisia de la Veneția)

The 90-day assessment takes into account:

the nature and number of injuries;
the type and length of treatment (surgery, immobilisation, rehabilitation, etc.);
complications that are reasonably connected to the original trauma.

Both doctrine and empirical medico-legal studies underline that the majority of maxillo-facial trauma cases remain under 90 days, which keeps them under Art. 193; only a small fraction reach the Art. 194 threshold.(rjor.ro)

5.3. Serious and permanent aesthetic injury

Art. 194 para. (1) c) covers situations where the violent act causes a serious and permanent aesthetic injury.(Comisia de la Veneția)

This is one of the most debated concepts in Romanian criminal law. A detailed doctrinal analysis by Andra-Roxana Trandafir and Dorel Herinean – tellingly titled “Beauty in criminal law. The curious case of Art. 194 para. (1) c) Criminal Code” – highlights that:(Facultatea de Drept)

not every visible scar qualifies;
courts look at visibility, size, location and impact on the person’s appearance;
loss of a single tooth, for instance, is often considered insufficient on its own, whereas large, visible facial scars or deformities usually meet the threshold.

The injury must be:

aesthetic (relating to appearance);
serious (not a minor imperfection); and
permanent (not easily corrected or hidden).

5.4. Abortion

Where violent acts cause the termination of a pregnancy, the law qualifies this as one of the possible consequences under Art. 194 para. (1) d).(Comisia de la Veneția)

In practice, this often requires:

a forensic obstetric-gynaecological report establishing the link between the violence and the loss of pregnancy;
correlation with the separate rules on unlawful termination of pregnancy in Art. 201 Criminal Code, if applicable.(Comisia de la Veneția)

5.5. Endangering a person’s life

Finally, Art. 194 para. (1) e) refers to “endangering an individual’s life”.(Comisia de la Veneția)

Doctrine and case-law emphasise that:

it is not enough for injuries to be “serious”;
there must be a real and serious danger of death, often evidenced by intensive-care treatment, major blood loss, severe cranial trauma or respiratory failure.(Codurile Penale)

If the perpetrator actually wanted to kill the victim or accepted that risk, the discussion moves towards attempted murder, not Art. 194. Bodily injury with life-endangering consequences usually involves intent to injure, not intent to kill, but in conditions that objectively placed the victim’s life at risk.(Justicia)

6. Aggravated forms and special circumstances

6.1. Purpose-based aggravation – Art. 194 para. (2)

Under Art. 194 para. (2), if the act is committed for the purpose of causing:

an infirmity, or
injuries requiring more than 90 days of medical care, or
a serious and permanent aesthetic injury,

the penalty increases to 3–10 years’ imprisonment, and attempt is punishable.(Comisia de la Veneția)

Here the focus shifts from the result alone to the specific intent: the person did not merely accept the risk of serious consequences, but acted precisely in order to produce them.

6.2. Circumstances that increase the limits by one third – Art. 194 para. (2¹)

Art. 194 now also contains a para. (2¹), which increases both the basic and aggravated penalty limits by one third where, for example:(Codurile Penale)

the victim was in the perpetrator’s care, protection, education, custody or treatment;
the victim is a minor;
the act was committed in public;
the perpetrator had with him/her a firearm, dangerous object, device, substance or animal capable of endangering life or bodily integrity.

These circumstances often appear together with domestic-violence provisions in Art. 199, which add a further increase of the maximum penalty when the victim is a family member.(Comisia de la Veneția)

7. Bodily injury by negligence (Art. 196) – not every serious injury is “intentional”

Many serious injury cases are not about fights, but about negligent conduct:

traffic accidents;
workplace accidents;
medical or professional negligence in certain contexts.

Art. 196 Criminal Code deals specifically with bodily injury by negligence, including where the victim suffers one of the Art. 194 para. (1) consequences.(Comisia de la Veneția)

In summary:

Art. 196 para. (1) sanctions negligent commission of an Art. 193 para. (2) act under certain aggravating factors (e.g. under the influence of alcohol or while performing an activity that is an offence in itself);
Art. 196 para. (2) covers negligent commission of an Art. 194 para. (1) act, punishable by 6 months to 2 years’ imprisonment or a fine;
further paragraphs raise penalties where professional safety rules are violated or where several victims are involved.(Comisia de la Veneția)

Specialised literature in English has analysed this article in detail, explaining how it re-structured the old offence of bodily injury by fault and how the 90-day threshold functions in practice.(publicatii.uvvg.ro)

8. How a bodily-injury case usually unfolds in practice

Every file is different, but the general structure is fairly predictable.

8.1. The case is opened

A case may be initiated:

following a prior complaint by the injured person (especially in former Art. 193-type situations); or
ex officio, particularly in domestic-violence or serious-injury scenarios.(Comisia de la Veneția)

8.2. Evidence is gathered

During the criminal investigation, the authorities typically collect:

statements of the injured person, suspect and witnesses;
forensic certificates, expert reports and medical files;
CCTV footage or phone recordings, where available.

At this stage, the legal classification may still be “battery” while the parties wait for final forensic conclusions on the number of medical-care days or the extent of any aesthetic or functional damage.(rjor.ro)

8.3. Charges and change of legal classification

Once forensic evidence is clear, the prosecution decides whether:

to keep the case under Art. 193;
to reclassify it as Art. 194 (bodily injury) or Art. 196 (bodily injury by negligence);
to add Art. 199 (domestic violence) or other offences in concurrence (robbery, unlawful deprivation of liberty, etc.).(studia.law.ubbcluj.ro)

The suspect may then formally acquire the status of defendant (inculpated person), with the full set of defence rights provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure.(VERTIC)

8.4. Indictment, trial and sentencing

If the prosecution considers there is enough evidence, it issues an indictment and sends the case to court. At trial:

evidence is re-examined (including the possibility of additional or counter-expertise);
the court decides on the final legal classification, guilt and penalty;
if the injured person has brought a civil claim, the court also decides on compensation (material and moral damages).(ijlso.ccdsara.ro)

9. Rights of the person accused of bodily injury

The defendant in a bodily-injury case has, among others, the right to:(VERTIC)

remain silent and not incriminate him- or herself;
be informed about the act and legal classification;
consult the case file;
be assisted by an attorney (chosen or court-appointed);
propose evidence (witnesses, expert reports, counter-expertise);
challenge procedural acts and lodge appeals against decisions.

These rights apply throughout the investigation and trial and are especially important in cases where the difference between Art. 193 and Art. 194 depends heavily on how facts and medical evidence are framed.

10. What the injured person can obtain

The injured person can join the criminal case as a civil party and claim:(ijlso.ccdsara.ro)

material damages – medical costs, lost income, rehabilitation expenses, care costs;
moral damages – physical pain, psychological suffering, damage to reputation and social life;
legal costs (including lawyers’ fees within the limits of the court’s practice).

Courts typically look at:

the type and seriousness of injuries (including whether Art. 194 consequences exist);
any permanent functional or aesthetic impact;
the context: repeated violence, domestic violence, the level of brutality, the degree of provocation, etc.(Răspunsuri Juridice)

11. Frequent practical mistakes

11.1. On the side of the injured person

Common pitfalls include:

not going to forensic medicine or failing to bring all medical documents, which weakens the ability to prove the 90-day threshold or the existence of an infirmity or aesthetic injury;(rjor.ro)
withdrawing a complaint without fully understanding the consequences, especially in domestic-violence contexts where prosecution rules are specific;(Comisia de la Veneția)
under-documenting expenses and the psychological impact, which leads to lower compensation than what might otherwise be justified.

11.2. On the side of the suspect/defendant

Defendants often harm their own position by:

giving detailed statements without legal advice, which later become central evidence;(VERTIC)
overlooking the importance of the exact medical and forensic wording, which can push a case from Art. 193 into Art. 194;(Comisia de la Veneția)
ignoring the possibility of a plea agreement when evidence is strong, although such an agreement could materially reduce the sentence within the statutory ranges.(Strategii Manageriale)

12. Short FAQ

Is a bodily-injury case possible even without a complaint from the victim?

Yes. For Art. 194 (bodily injury), criminal proceedings are generally initiated ex officio. The requirement of a prior complaint mainly characterises Art. 193 and some negligent forms, with exceptions in domestic-violence situations where the law allows ex officio prosecution.(Comisia de la Veneția)

Can the classification change from battery to bodily injury during the case?

Yes. If, for example, initial forensic findings show 40 days of medical care and later supplementary expertise concludes that more than 90 days were necessary, or that there is an infirmity or serious aesthetic injury, the prosecutor or the court can reclassify the offence from Art. 193 to Art. 194.(Comisia de la Veneția)

What is the difference between bodily injury and attempted murder?

In rough terms:

bodily injury focuses on the result (infirmity, >90 days of care, aesthetic injury, abortion, life endangerment), with the typical intent being to injure, not to kill;(Comisia de la Veneția)
attempted murder requires intent to take life (direct or indirect), usually inferred from factors such as the weapon, the area of the body targeted, the number and intensity of blows, and the attacker’s behaviour.(studia.law.ubbcluj.ro)

Where the evidence shows that the perpetrator only intended to inflict bodily harm, even though the victim’s life was put in danger, courts tend to retain Art. 194 para. (1) e) rather than attempted murder.

13. Final thoughts

In the Romanian system, bodily injury (Art. 194 Criminal Code) sits at a crucial junction:

it is more serious than ordinary battery (Art. 193), but not yet an offence against life;
it is strongly driven by forensic medicine (number of medical-care days, existence of infirmity or aesthetic injury);
its interaction with domestic-violence rules, negligence, and other offences often turns relatively “simple” conflicts into cases with real imprisonment risks and substantial financial exposure.(Comisia de la Veneția)

For anyone involved in such a case – injured person or defendant – understanding how Art. 194 works in practice, how the 90-day threshold is applied and how forensic reports influence the legal classification is essential. The difference between a file that remains under Art. 193 and one that crosses into Art. 194 can mean years of liberty, reputation and financial stability.

Sources and further reading

Romanian Criminal Code (Law no. 286/2009) – unofficial English translation, including Arts. 193, 194, 196 and 199 (European Commission for Democracy through Law – Venice Commission).(Comisia de la Veneția)
Law no. 116/2025 of 23 June 2025 amending the Criminal Code and Law no. 26/2024 on protective orders – Portal Legislativ (official Romanian legislation database).(Portal Legislativ)
Andra-Roxana Trandafir, Dorel Herinean, “Frumusețea în dreptul penal. Curiosul caz al art. 194 alin. (1) lit. c) C.pen.”, AUBD – Forum Juridic no. 2/2021 – doctrinal analysis of serious and permanent aesthetic injury.(Facultatea de Drept)
Bela Attila Zazula, “Bodily Injury by Fault in the New Romanian Criminal Code”, Journal of Legal Studies, 17(31)/2016 – English-language study on Art. 196 and the concept of bodily injury by negligence.(publicatii.uvvg.ro)
Nicolae Elvis Cioabă, “Infracţiunea de vătămare corporală din culpă în noul Cod penal”, scientific review of the University of Bucharest Faculty of Law – Romanian doctrinal analysis of Art. 196 and the 90-day threshold.(Facultatea de Drept)
R.E. Botros et al., “Retrospective study on the medico-legal implications of buco-maxillo-facial trauma”, Romanian Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2025 – empirical data on trauma cases classified under Arts. 193 and 194 by reference to days of medical care and aesthetic damage.(rjor.ro)