Aims: A study was performed to compare the efficacy of sevoflurane and propofol as an induction agent in providing I-gel insertion conditions like jaw relaxation, ease of insertion, patient movement, coughing, laryngospasm in patients undergoing general anaesthesia for elective surgical procedures. Methods: Sixty patients of ASA grade I and II, aged between 18 and 60 years, of either sex, scheduled for elective surgeries under general anaesthesia, were randomly allocated into two equal groups of 30 patients each. In group S, induction was done by 8% sevoflurane in fresh gas flow of 8L O2 and in group P, inj. propofol, 2.5 mg per kg intravenously used for induction. Induction time, jaw relaxation time, insertion time, insertion conditions, number of attempts, perioperative haemodynamic parameters and postoperative complications were assessed. Results: Both groups were comparable with regard to demographic data. The induction time, jaw relaxation time, and I-gel insertion time were significantly rapid in group P compared to group S. The overall I-gel insertion conditions and jaw relaxation grading were better in group P compared to group S. Though heart rate and mean arterial pressure were significantly decreased in group P, however, patients were remained haemodynamically stable. No significant postoperative complications were observed in both groups. Conclusion: Propofol is superior to sevoflurane for insertion of I-gel. However, propofol is associated with fall in mean arterial pressure and pulse rate. Therefore, induction with 8% sevoflurane can be considered as an alternative to intravenous propofol induction for I-gel insertion.