IFHE, Hyderabad

(Declared as Deemed-to-be university under Section 3 of the UGC Act 1956)

A REPORT ON
Comparative Analysis of The Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 and The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

BY
SAKSHI JHA
20FLICHH010232

Under
V. Raghunath
Designated Senior Advocate Telangana High Court

V. Raghunath and Associates

16-2-705/20, flat no. 202, Metro Pillar no. A1467, Beside Canara Bank,
Malakpet, Telangana- 500036.

1
 A REPORT ON
Comparative Analysis of The Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 and The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

BY
SAKSHI JHA
20FLICHH010232

Report submitted in fulfilment of the Requirement of BBA LLB(Hons.)

Program of ICFAI Law, School, IFHE, Hyderabad, Telangana.

DISTRIBUTION LIST:
1. ICFI LAW SCHOOL HYDERABAD
2. Project Guide – Senior Designated Advocated V. Raghunath, V. Raghunath &
associates
3. Faculty Guide - Astha Srivastava Ma’am

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This project would not have been successful without the support and aid of numerous people
and organisations. Grateful to each and every one of them.
I’d want to earnestly thank my guide Advocate V. Raghunath sir, who is a designated Senior
Associate of Hyderabad High Court. Head of V. Raghunath and associates for providing me
with the opportunity to intern at such reputable office.
I express my gratitude to my project guide, Advocate V. Raghunath and Advocate Sanjana
ma, am without their guidance this project would not have been possible. Their
support and guidance, during the internship, were unparalleled. Their constant supervision
helped me to finish my internship pleasantly and peacefully.
I would like to sincerely thank my dean, Mr A.V. Narsimha Rao, who allowed us to learn
through this internship.
I would also like to thank my mentor and the faculty in charge, Astha Srivastava ma’am
for supervising me and always being available to clear all my doubts and queries.
My sincerest regard and gratitude to the other advocates and all who are contributors to this
project.

3
 INDEX

S. no. TOPIC Pg. No.

1. Acknowledgment 3

2. Abstract 5

3. Introduction 6

4. Main Text 6-8

 Problems with the existing laws
 Objective of Britishers to make laws
5. Process of enactment of Law 9 -10

6. Analysis of new Act BNSS 11-12

 New sections added to BNSS
7. Analysis of Crpc, 1973 and BNSS, 2023 13- 18

8. Criticism or praise? 19- 22

9. Internship work relating to the project 22- 24

10. Conclusion 24-25

11. Refrences 25

4
 ABSTRACT
This project will involve the culmination of theoretical and descriptive knowledge of legal
concepts learnt in the academic curriculum with the practical application of such knowledge
in the cases.
The topic of my final project ‘Comparative Analysis of the Code of the Criminal Procedure
and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
I chose this topic for my project because to understand the change in new legal trends in our
country. Last year in the month of twentieth December, 2023 in the ongoing parliament
proceedings in the Lokshabha, our Minister of Home, Amit Shah, presented three new bills to
swap the British era criminal laws, which were very crucial to govern our country and their
contributions have helped India to shape law and order and properly establish them. and
these contributions even in today’s date important laws of India.
The objective of this paper is to analyse whether we really needed new laws to govern our
Country, or was it just a political tactic of the government to be in power, and try to change
the ideology of our country, and leading it towards dictatorship. I intended to analyse the new
changes which were brought in by these three acts, stating it is going to help Bharat in
progressing towards new change, or in reality it is a draconian law. These new criminal laws
have created a new juxtaposition in our country to decide whether these new laws are really
for the betterment of law and order or is it going to bring in a chaotic mess with it in the law
and order, affecting the Constitutional courts, its advocates, law officers, and public safety.

5
 INTRODUCTION

In our India Acts are amended based on changing in society’s needs. India is known for its
democracy, but what exactly constitutes any country as a democratic country? Can we say
that our country is actually one hundred percent democratic or is it a mixture of
egalitarianism and tyranny. It is plausible to believe that a democratic system is an
establishment of freedom, and our constitution is the shield of democracy. But what exactly
is constitution? In a simple term we can say that it is an ensemble of fundamental principles
or established norms that governs an organisation and it outlines the responsibilities allotted
to each member and holding them accountable for operating it.
Our judicial system stands on four strong pillars which are very crucial to maintain law and
order in our system. These pillars are firstly, our Constitution of India, then our Indian penal
code, thirdly our Criminal Procedure Court and lastly our Indian Evidence Act. All these
pillars guarantee us fundamental rights, gives a wide-ranging criminal code that covers a
inclusive range of offenses, the legislation that governs any disagreements requiring the
presentation of any kind of proof. 1But the question is when we had such strong criminal acts
which has been governing the law and order of India for years now. Why is it being removed
and bringing in new bills. Is there any lacuna in the old criminal laws? where they properly
rectified in new the bills?

What’s the problem with existing laws?

To find the problem we will first have to dive into the roots of it. The criminal laws which we
had for more than a century now, has lots of lacuna in it because the laws which was passed
by then British government was very eccentric and not for the actual betterment of our
country. It was for their own convenience to exploit the resource of our country for their own
profit.
At the time when Britishers were ruling our country, in their period, the Law Commission
was on its way to setup to make laws on different subjects.
The first law commission was set up by Thomas Babington Macaulay and thirty other
members in the year 1834. They made some important laws in our country, it resulted in
codification of the penal and criminal code.

1
Chowdhury, Dhanashree, and Mahua Roy Chowdhury. “The Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Criminal
Procedure Code (CrPC), and the Indian Evidence Act to be revamped.” Lexology, 6 Sept. 2023,
www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c84a6d2d-d128-4ad4-b8ef-cac874bbdbd8.

6
The second law commission, third and fourth law commission was respectively established in
the year 1853, 1861, and 1879. These three law commissions were setup before our country’s
liberation by the British rule. They have under wrote to the statute books enormously.

These commissions by looking at Indian conditions made some important laws in the next
fifty years. And the contributions are really important that even in today’s date the very
important laws of India like Contract Act, Transfer of property Act, and Code of procedure,
etc these contributions have helped in building the law and order in our country. But what
could be the motive of the Britishers to make laws for such country who are ruled by them
and been treated inhumanely manner.

These criminal laws were the exact replica of the British Criminal jurisprudence and as we
have conversed in the supra these laws were not made for the betterment of our country but it
was made to rule and oppress our country people and punish them mercilessly.

In todays day and age if we properly look into our criminal jurisprudence there are many
sections and rules which are extraneous in our current set-up as we have come a long way
and evolved in every aspect be it technology, crime rate, innovations, education, etc.

The NDA Government when they won the election and came into power in the central
government in the year 2014. They initiated the proposal of modifying the legal structure for
better accessible of justice, affordable for everyone and try to make it more citizen centric
edifice. For that reason, In the year of 2019 letters were send to all Governors, Lieutenant
Governors, Chief Ministers of all states, Administrators of states and Union Territories for
their propositions on all-inclusive amendments to the criminal laws. Their main objective was
to address the issues which were pertaining to these criminal laws.

Objective of Britishers to make laws

Exploiting the resources of India-

Britishers in their own greed to run the country according to its rule and keep staying in
power, and to exploit the resources of our country and take it back to their own country to
make itself more powerful and develop its own country, it thought of setting up the law and
order to stop any type of revolt from happening. With this intention they tried to preserve its
commercial and fiscal interests. The main aim of regal government was to reduce our country

7
to a mere supplier of the raw materials and for the betterment and progression of their own
country, by stealing many immaculate goods which in todays date the value of it is
unconceivable.

Along with this in parliament Amit Shah, Ministry of Home Affairs, said that these laws
even after the seventy- six years of independence from the regal rule who ruled us for more
than a century, these laws there is more than hundred places, where the ‘British crown’ is
mentioned in these laws. This shows that even after obtaining the Independence from the
colonial slavery we are still following their eccentric laws.

Apart from these there are other problems in the existing criminal laws.

Firstly, these laws are not gender neutral, which creates the biggest lacuna in the image which
we create of independent judiciary. For better understanding we can take an example which
helps in better explanation as to how it is important to have gender neutral laws. In our Indian
judiciary we can take up lot of examples which shows that how the legislature at the time of
making these laws neglected the gender diversity and assumed that women don’t play an
important role in the society or how woman can only be a victim to the crime but not a
perpetrator.

For example, we ca take the Indian Penal Code, section 497, which talks about the crime of
adultery, wherein it says that if a man with knowing that the woman is a wife of someone and
still has sexual intercourse without the knowledge of that person to whom she is married to, it
shall be constitute as adultery and it is a penal offence.

In this section it is believe that only men can commit such offence and men are always the
perp and woman, whether be it her fault or not is always assumed to be the victim. If a
woman would commit the same offence of having a sexual offence with a married man
without the knowledge of the husband’s wife, it wouldn’t be constituted as an adultery which
was very dubious.

But this section was struck down by the supreme court on the grounds that it violated the
constitution Articles 14, 15 and 21. Which gives equal rights to both men and woman.

8
 We can take the next example of domestic violence wherein it is assumed that only
woman can be the target of domestic violence and man is always the perp who caused such
violence or let it happen. The legislators when created the act of domestic violence their main
intention was to protect women from facing wrath of the inhumane violence suffered by them
in her in-laws’ home by her husband, or by her in-laws or by the in-laws relatives. Which was
very legitimate concern of the legislature and of the judiciary, but as the time changes, new
technologies came into force, people are getting more educated about their rights and being
more aware that law protects the victim especially if it is a woman.
Because women have always been subject to cruelty and violence from men since centuries
and ages now. But as the times have changed, women have learned to misuse the rights
provided to them for their own personal gain, by harassing the men and his family members
and filing a false case of domestic violence. But it doesn’t only gets limited to that there are
n number of false cases being registered against men( husband) by their wife’s for dowry
cases, rape cases, violence’s, etc.

Process of enactment of law

Now, in my report I have researched about the new provision of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 which came into force in 1 st of July 2024. This new act has replaced Criminal
procedure code, 1973. To understand how these bills became an Act.
 In the March 2020 Centre constituted a panel to suggest reforms in the jurisprudence
of criminal laws.
 In Feb,2022 the central government invited public suggestion because any big
changes that affects the public at large, it is essential to take public opinion on it. Just
like how the government took opinions of public in Uniform civil code.
 After this, the committee submitted its report to the central government, this
committee was constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
 After this Law Minister submitted to the Rajya Sabha that the present government
has started comprehensive review of current criminal laws.
 In August, 2023 end of the monsoon session, the union Home Minister tabled these
three new bills.

9
  The centre proposed these three bills on August 11 th, 2023 in Rajya Sabha first, then
again, those three bills were amended and reintroduced on 12 th December, 2023 in the
Lok Sabha.
 In this way all three of the bills got approved and passed by the both Houses of
Parliament. The president has given assent to the bills on 25 th Dec, 2023. That is how
the bill got converted into Act. 2

The Committee main objective was to remove the colonial era rules and uphold the
constitutional values such as principles of natural justice, dignity and intrinsic value of each
individual. These changes will be beneficial for the society in the future but we have to give
importance to the “planning”.

2
Pre-Legislative Consultation for the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bhartiya
Sakshya Acts. pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2001862#:~:text=After%20passing%20of%20three
%20Bills,2023.%E2%80%9D.

10
Analysis of the new Act BNSS
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is a new provision which has replaced the
code of criminal procedure, 1973. This new Act has 533 sections and two schedules
compared to the Crpc, which has 484 sections. This new act has added 49 sections. This Act
has rescinded nine sections from the old act and it has made changes in 160 sections by
acquaint with new nine provisions. As we all know Crpc was known as “Accused’s
Constitution” because it tells us about the procedure of bails, trials. 3

Crpc has helped in establishing a hierarchy of courts in our country, in section six of it it talks
about establishment of courts. Says that apart from High court in every state there shall be
court of session, court of judicial magistrate, first class magistrate, second class, metropolitan
magistrate and executive magistrate.
But in BNSS, the concept of Metropolitan magistrate has been removed in totality and shall
from now shall not be in function.

The new BNSS has brought in some new significant amendments in it. And they are:

- Sec 2(1)(a) talks about the “audio-video Electronic Means”

- Sec 2(1)(b) talks about bail
- Sec 2(1)(d) states about bail bond
- A new clause is added to the section 35(7) in the BNSS where it talks about when the
police has the power to arrest without warrant.
- Sec 86 it talks about the identification and attachment of property of proclaimed
person. Where it has extended its power to attach the properties of the offender. Who
has been declared as an offender of a particular offence and then they identify the
properties and attach it.
- Then Sec 105 states that, the recording of search and seizure through audio-video
electronic means. It gives the investigating police the power to record if any search
and seizure is going on, which is a helpful and crucial addition in this act, as this helps
in identifying the seized goods obtained from the house, increases the level of
transparency, that the seized goods have indeed been obtained from perp house, or
from what location, at what time, condition of the goods at the time of seizing. In
3
Admin. “IPC, CrPC & Evidence Act : Replaced by New Criminal Laws Key Changes | Salient Features.”
Lawrbit, 3 July 2024, www.lawrbit.com/article/ipc-crpc-evidence-act-replaced-by-new-criminal-laws.

11
 what manner the goods have been seized, proper procedure has been followed or not.
Gives a lot of transparency.
- Sec 107 states about the attachment, forfeiture or restoration of property at the time of
case proceedings.
- Sec 172 talks about the, persons bound to conform to lawful directions of police. in
this section the police power has been amplified by giving them the power to issue
any directions to anyone and they are bound to it.
- The Sec 336 of BNSS states that evidence of public servants, experts, public officers
in certain cases. This new addition of section allows an officer, public servants,
medical officers etc., to testify if the original officer is unavailable due to reasons like
death, transfer, retirement, etc to expedite the case proceedings. 4
- In the Sec 356 it talks about the Inquiry, trial or judgment in absentia of proclaimed
offender, in this if by any chance the proclaimed offender avoids the trail by means of
absconding, the Hon’ble judge has the power to pronounce the judgment in their
absences. This section helps in providing an expedite proceedings of the trail.
- In this Sec 398 witness protection scheme, this is anew addition of section where the
legislator has thought about the protection of the witnesses if by any chance their life
gets in danger because of the statement given by the witness in the box. But the
implementation of it would be real difficult, if the legislator has not provided a proper
procedure for it. And at what cases or in what situation such witness protection
scheme becomes important to provide.
- Sec 472 talks about mercy petition in death sentence cases, if the perp got convicted
and as a punishment death. The perp is allowed to file a mercy petition within a
stipulated period of time.
- In this Sec 530 talks about where the trial and proceeding to be held in electronic
mode. In this the trials and proceedings can be held by video mode, where the
advocate representing the matters can attend the trial through online.

Analysis of Crpc, 1973 and BNSS, 2023

4
Admin. “IPC, CrPC & Evidence Act : Replaced by New Criminal Laws Key Changes | Salient Features.”
Lawrbit, 3 July 2024, www.lawrbit.com/article/ipc-crpc-evidence-act-replaced-by-new-criminal-laws.

12
In this we are analysing the differences between the old criminal law and the new criminal
law. Firstly, in any criminal jurisprudence registering of FIR is essential. As it is the first
steps towards the beginning of the investigation procedure.
- Registration of FIR
In the crpc the Lodging of FIR is under the section 154 but where as in our BNSS the
registration of FIR comes under the section of 173. In this section the committee has brought
up a major change and it is that where the police power has been increased abruptly.
In the case of Lalitha Kumari v. state of Uttar Pradesh in that Judgment the filing or lodging
of FIR was made mandatory by the station house officer. There is a slightly Mis-construing
the process of registration of FIR. Where in section 154 when a officer in charge of police
station receives an information as to commission of a cognizable offence he shall register
such true information in writing. In our old section there is no provision which talks about the
registration of zero FIR but after the Nirbhaya case, the provision of registering a zero FIR
was also enabled.

The BNSS has provided under section 173 registering of zero first information report more
explicitly. By lodging the FIR orally or we can lodge an e-FIR through Electronic mode of
Communication. Under this section, if an e-FIR is registered, the person registered an e-FIR
will be called into the police station within 3 days and will have to sign on the FIR copy.
Many people have misconstrued this particular section because they have analysed that they
have compared the fact of registration of FIR with the judgement of Lalitha Kumari and there
many have analysed that the registration of FIR has been made discretion by the people.
Because they have mis analysed that if a person is lodging a FIR, the police in its own
discretion while conducting a 14-day preliminary inquiry if they think that there is no need to
investigate, they have the power to not register the FIR. But the analysing is wrong because
the actual section talks about the mandate registration of FIR.

The actual construction section 173 (3) talks about that after the registering of an FIR, the sub
section (3) says that if there is an offence which is punishable for three years or but less than
seven years, instead of doing an investigation here, you can take permission of from the
Deputy superintendent of police to conduct preliminary inquiry, which will run upto 14 days.
Under this preliminary inquiry of 14 days if the police can decide whether we need to
conduct an investigation or not.

13
This section helps the officer in charge of police station, to resolve his doubt whether we
need to investigate or not. It provides the clarity where the offence is of the nature of petty
offence or less serious in nature, and unnecessarily the accused should not be harassed and to
be resolved in the fourteen days of preliminary inquiry that whether we get strong evidence
against the accused in the preliminary investigation. Only then should the police proceed
against this allegation, otherwise there is no need to proceed and the police will stop the
proceeding then and there itself.
- Police Custody
the section 167 of crpc where it talks about the procedure of one investigation where it cannot
be completed within a span of twenty-four hours from the arrest. Then the police officer can
go to the nearest judicial officer where he has the jurisdiction or not. The judicial magistrate
can allow their further custody if further detention requirement is there. But our new Act
BNSS, section 187 has become a debatable topic because it has the tendency to violate the
Article 21 of the Indian constitution, with respect to arrest of a person.

So, under sec 187, if the police is unable to complete an investigation under twenty four
hours then the police will forward the accused person to the nearest judicial magistrate then,
the judicial magistrate has to take care of two things.5

1. whether the person whom we have produced in the court is not on the Bail? If it is not on
bail then the court will proceed further.

2. if the bail of the arrested person is cancelled. Then in these two circumstances the court
can send an arrested person to further detention.

Now the person who will be sent to further detention will be like this, whatever your offense
is, it is bifurcated in two categories. First is, an offense referred to in the following section is
punishable with death penalty. Which is death, Life imprisonment or punishment not less
than 10 years or more than 10 years. In these offenses the perpetrator can be detained for a
maximum of 90 days.

The second category is of any offense which is other than these above, then if there is any
offense which is punishable for less than 10 years, for example seven years then the

5
DHNS, and DHNS. “New criminal laws draconian, give more powers to state and police, say experts.”
Deccan Herald, 18 July 2024, www.deccanherald.com/india/karnataka/bengaluru/new-criminal-laws-
draconian-give-more-powers-to-state-and-police-say-experts-3111657.

14
perpetrator can be detain for a period of 60 days. These both are same as section 167 but
there is a catch here.

Generally, when a person is sent to police custody, he can be send only according to one sixty
seven section and that person who we are sending into police custody, then we cannot keep
that person for more than 15 days in polic custody. In respect to this there were two
judgements one was CBI v. Anupam J Kulkarni, 1992 and the other one is in V. Senthil
Balaji v. the state 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 611. These two judgements are very important. In the
first Anupam Kularni judgement stated that if ever the police is arresting a person, the police
can send him to 15 days of custody. But this period of time can be claimed only from the date
of his arrest and after the completion of this period, the police can only detain an accused
person in judicial custody or anyother kind of custody. But in the year 2023, can claim police
custody.

The judgment of v. Senthil Balaji case, the Supreme Court held that if we ever have to send a
person in the police custody then in that respect the supra case of Anupam J Kulkarni
judgement is wrong. The reason being is that, according to this judgement, we are hampering
the polices investigation powers. If after 15 days of the investigation, the police require
custody and he never took police custody in the beginning, then in that situation we have
hampered the powers of investigation of the police, which is the prerogative of the police, so
in its respect the judgement of V. Senthil Balaji, the Hn’ble Supreme Court send the accused
to police custody even after 55 days of arrest.

That means Anupam J Kulkarni said that if you want to send a person to police custody then
you can give police custody for 15 days anytime between the duration of 60 days and 90
days. It is okay and it was said that Anupam J Kulkarni Judgemnt should be sent to larger
bench to refer and after that the final judgement should come after that.

But our new criminal law, BNSS sec 187, says that if ever a person is arrested then after the
arrest we will be totally punished. That person can be detained for 60 days and 90 days and
that will be the first 40 days of arrest or 60 days of arrest. That means that 40 days of
detention in case of an offense which prescribes for 60 days of detention and 60 days in case
of an offense which prescribes for 90 days of detention. If we ever arrest a person for these
crimes then for the initial 40 days and 60 days we can send that person to any custody, it can
be either a police custody or judicial custody and in during this forty and 60 days in any
period, the police can keep the accused person in police custody or judicial custody for 15

15
days. At any part of the time, you can be kept in police custody for 15 days. After expiry of
15 days we can further detain him but we cannot detain him for 60 more days or ninety days.
This new section has side-lined both the judgments.

The play in here is that in sec 167 of old code, it has categorically said us that if you are
arresting a person then we cannot keep him more than fifteen days of police custody, but if
we have to detain him more than 15 days than we have to keep him in other custody but not
in police custody. However sec 187 of our new criminal law has omitted this fact, we cannot
find the word ‘police custody’ in section 187. The conflict herein is that it is till very unclear
that for how many days we can keep him in the police custody or judicial custody. Because in
the section there is only one word been used that only “any custody” the police think fit.

The standing committees report of 11 th August when Hon’ble Home Minister presented it in
the parliament and referred this bill to the standing committee, from their discussion, it is
understood that the word custody which has been used, that if ever a person is arrested and
wants to send in the police custody, then the police has to send that person within the first 60
days and forty days only. But if these specified period of time gets expired then you cannot
keep him in police custody, you will have to send that person in another custody for the
remaining period of twenty days or thirty days.

Now, these human rights activist and other people are little apprehensive, that is, if the police
ever in the first 40 days, doesn’t take the police custody of the accused person then, what will
the police do to claim the custody of that person? The police can only claim the custody of
that person only after the forty days and sixty days when either the person is already in
detention or the person is out on bail.

We can take a scenario for the better understanding of it. Suppose when an offence is
committed, a person is arrested. This person stays in jail for 10 days. After ten days he is
released on bail. But after the person getting released on bail, if the police feels that we need
that person in custody, take him in remand is required, then, the provision here says that the
court at the time of while granting for the detention will look into the fact that whether this
person has not been released on bail yet or whether this persons bail has been cancelled. This
makes something very critical that if there is ever need for police custody of the person, then
the police have an upper hand in that they will either press for deny of the bail of that person
on the basis that we need this person in police custody so he should not be released on bail.

16
Reason being in the first forty and sixty days of the arrest, the investigating officer can ask
for the custody of the accused for the period of fifteen days.

The second thing is that there is also an possibility that if a person has been released on bail
then after the cancellation of the bail, that person may be taken in police custody.

here peoples main apprehension in understanding that, this increase in police power can lead
to increase in custodial tortuer and promotes in custodial violence. Because after the granting
of bail, cancelling of bail makes the accused more vulnerable in the police custody.

If any person is an under-trial person then what is the time for which he can remain
incarcerated. What is the provision given for maximum time of incarceration? The maximum
time is half of the maximum punishment which is prescribed for the offence, in the old
criminal code in the sec 436A, it is prescribed that if the maximum period is prescribed and a
person is kept in detention, then the person cannot be detain at any time for more than the
maximum imprisonment prescribed by the code. In this section it provides the right to
application of bail for an accused who has been detained for half of the maximum
imprisonment for the offence.

In here, the BNSS denies this ability for anyone facing multiple charges. As many cases
involve charges under multiple sections, this may limit such bail. The use of handcuffs is
permitted in range of cases of organised crimes including economic offences, contradicting
supreme Court Directions.

- Scope for plea bargaining may be limited

In here plea bargaining is defined in old code under 265 A is incorporated. It is of two types
of things, one is charge bargaining and the other one is sentence bargaining. It is the report of
Hon’ble Malimath saheb’s committee that if the concept of plea bargain was introduced in
India, then the concept of plea bargain was make known to in the modification of 2005. After
this concept, provision of sentence bargaining was added. This is if a person is alleged to
have Committed an offense which is punishable with three years of imprisonment, then
admitting his mistake to the victim. Then could have gotten the three-year sentence reduce by
apologizing. Then it can be gotten it done through Mutual Satisfactory Disposition. As per
the provisions of section 265A, there was no such limitation prescribed but in respect of the
offences there is no limitation with respect to period.

17
The new criminal code, the provision of plea bargaining has been used as it is. There is no
true change but what is creating a huge difference is that once the charges are framed against
the accused person, once the changes are framed against the accused person, the accused
person has to apply for plea bargaining within 30 days from the day of the accused will have
to apply for plea bargaining within thirty days from the date of framing of charges. And here
in this way the new bill has created an impact of the effectiveness of PB and limited the
opportunity of plea bargaining.

Good aspects of old criminal law

- Statement made to the station house officer is not admissible in the court of law.
Because there is higher chance of manipulating the statements according to their own
will and wishes.
what we actually need is to tune our criminal laws in accord with the basic freedoms of the
constitution. Mainly Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution, where we get freedom of
speech, freedom to move around, live, work, and right to Liberty, life etc. Unfortunately, the
legislation has not been so attuned with it.
There should be a task force which should look into these laws on the touchstone of these
three provisions of the constitution and only then will be able to come out. Enforced in a
phased manner is really crucial for any new laws.

A police officer can arrest a person on suspicion. Now suspicion is a subjective thing. So we
have drastic laws like UAPA, PMLA, etc. can arrest a person on suspicion and no one can
challenge it. The process of arresting someone without fully investigating the matter is very
dangerous. If we look into these laws in the light of the constitutional freedom. We need to
tweak those laws, if we tweak it in the light of the constitution that you don’t give power of
arrest to a junior police officer who will lock you up and the next day we found that there is
no real grounds. In our courts there is no compensation for vexatious arrests. 6

Even if the police have drastic powers because of terrorism and stuff like that giving it to a
merely senior police officer doesn’t suffice. We must have some checks and balances on
different levels.

Firstly, it either needs a fundamental legislative restructuring and along with that it needs a

complete change of mindset of judiciary also. Botn are contributed to a degradation

6
Live Law. “New Criminal Laws Worse In Matters Of Arrest, Remand and Bail? Sibal, Rohatgi &
Singhvi.” YouTube, 28 Feb. 2024, www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1tYE9anKyw.

18
 and decay of the criminal system of the constitutional values. Weve got these grand

articles of 14, 19.20, 21, etc. of the constitution. Admin.

For example, if we take bail, in the serious offences everywhere in the world, we get bail.
Leaving aside a few categories of terrorism, or child molestation, etc. we get bail. The classic
and the only original test for bail is that

1. you have presumption of innocence. And this innocence can be only effectuated by giving
you bail, but putting on certain conditions and it is what we call the famous triple test, that we
will not interfere with witnesses, will cooperate, you will not flee, and there is no flight risk.
If you will marry the principle of presumption of innocence with the freedom that is the
person is not a flight risk, ready to cooperate, and even appear in the court. But there is a
gravity of offense. This gravity of offense must be investigated.
What is the question of gravity of offense?
Without that you can’t convict, cannot try, giving some subjective view of gravity of offense.
The whole point of bail is that till you convict or acquit on the gravity of offense, bail can be
given.

Criticism or praise?
Now when we look from the perspective of whether the new laws or gender neutral or not?

We can say that; the new criminal laws are pretty gender-neutral laws. in the old law, it is
always seen from the perspective of victim but now in the new law it is seen from the angle
of victims and also from the point of view of the perpetrator. These new laws are gender
neutral from perpetrators angle.

For example, in old laws, outraging the modesty of women were, only by men it can be done.
But in new laws, it can be filed against by women outraging the modesty of a women, men
outraging the modesty of a women.

The system of taking date after date in every trial proceeding, intentionally trying to delay the
proceedings of the court. In this new act the legislator tried to end this vicious system of
delaying the proceedings of the court.

The intention of central government was that they wanted to make the legal system more
efficient and productive. So, if anyone files the case the equitable justice will be delivered
within three years from the date of start of the trial proceedings.

19
Along with this the maximum time limit of filing charge sheet has also been given in the
criminal code. The maximum stipulated timeline given for the filing of charge sheet is 180
days which is (90+ 90 days).

This helps in fast start of the proceedings. Filing of charge sheet is a necessary provision step,
where it helps in taking the first step in the direction of attaining of the justice. It helps in start
the process of trial and stop the unnecessary delay can be avoided.

In the old criminal code, when the summons is given by the court, only the men of the house
could accept it, but now after the existing of new laws, it is stated that, when a summon is
served to any person, anyone of the family member can receive it. Be a man or a woman.

The New age crimes have been recognized strictly. Crimes like:

- Snatching,
- Mob lynching
- Fake promises to marriage
- Question paper leak
- ATM theft
- Ponzi scheme

Other serious crimes like terrorism, separatism, armed rebellion against the government. All
these threats are danger to India’s security and sovereignty. All these acts are recognized
separately.

The new bill has introduced community service as a punishment for

1. petty crimes

2. Defamation

Whether amendtment of existing laws could have been better? Was it necessary to bring new
laws?

We cannot change the principle with amendment or modification. Existing laws had lot of
colonial references. Along with this the whole structure is very scattered. The new laws has
better structure and provisions

1. Digitization
2. Better involvement of forensic team

20
 3. Strict time line for filing of charge sheet
4. Video recording of the statements.

Criticism of the Bill

1. Name of the bill- the central government is trying to create more Hindutva imposition. Our
India is a home for billions of people who have different religion, language, caste,
understanding of things, etc. trying to change the name of our country from India to Bharat, is
more of a draconian religious imposition rather than portraying that we are restoring our
centuries old history, etc. stating that the names are in Sanskrit only the contents are in
Hindi.7

2. why couldn’t we have continued with the existing names; existing laws focus on
punishment but new law focusses on justice and not on punishment. But it is not easy to
structure justice, it is rather easier said than done. It is difficult to impose justice, when
people still believe that these new laws are draconian imposition on public. Where the
opinion of legal judiciary was not taken

3. the new laws was brought into force rather quickly, it should have been imposed in a
phase’s manner. They should have imposed first few provisions of the bill and should have
seen how the public is reacting towards it. Whether there is a positive criticism or negative.
The first six months should have been a trial phase.

4. There was no proper time given to the judiciary system to adapt to the new bills,
understand the legal provisions of the bills, provide constructive criticism to the bills, give
commentaries on the new added sections. Analyse what else can be improved, whether all the
sections are according to the constitution and not violating the constitutional rights of the
general public.

5. provisions for video recording of statements was introduced, but do we even have a proper
infrastructure to implement these laws smoothly? Do we have proper technology to support
our vast courts system, skilled members to properly able to function these technologies?

6. Before jumping the gun and implanting the new laws, the legislature should have analysed
with the judiciary that how much differences will come in the legal system, what changes will
the legal fraternity change? How much burden will it mire create on the already over
7
meneka Guruswamy,Menaka Guruswamy writes: In new criminal codes, fundamental rights are in
danger, Indian Express, July 20, 2024, https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/menaka-
guruswamy-writes-in-new-criminal-codes-fundamental-rights-are-in-danger-9464329/.

21
burdened courts who are still not able to close 1990s cases. The courts way of working will
also be changed.

7. what are the changes that all the schools and colleges will have to change in their syllabus.
Do the faculties have adequate knowledge on such new changed provisions?

8. all the lawyers, advocates, paralegals, judicial members of the court officers, etc will have
to again re-read the sections of all those three bills. Will have to interpret it and argue in the
court, which leads in delaying of more court proceedings.

9. The government before deciding anything they should have paid attention to what impact
is being done on them. Because bringing laws is one thing and implementing them is another.

10. All the stakeholders should have been taken care of while planning and implementing.
Which was not done properly. And this lead to lot of distrust in the eyes of public, judiciary
system, public officers.

11. If old cases have to be processed by old laws, then new cases have to be processed by
new laws, this created a lot of inconvenience with lot of confusion. Both the hon’ble judges
and the advocates will be confused all the time.

It is always easy to change the acts or laws there is no problem in that, but there is always a
real challenge in to get these acts executed properly and to get the court to work effectively.

Internship work

In my 45 days of internship from 17 th of June, 2024 to 27th of July, 2024. I have seen various
types of cases be it civil, criminal, environmental, etc. I have witnessed a PIL of environment
protection of hillock, this case was fought for 16 years and on 27 th of June, final order was
passed in favour of protection of hillock which is a government land and it was held that,
protection of such land is really crucial for the protection of environment. I have seen UAPA
cases where the accused who is a rider was booked under an offence of 43(D)(5) of UAPA
act.

A case of Osmania college PIL in the first court, for starting BALLB semester in the month
of July, wednesbury principle was used -a authority who in his position makes a wrong
decision court has right to interfere in it.

22
The filing of FIR was done under section 173 of the new criminal act BNSS, where the
occurrence of offence took place before the enforcement of the new acts. But the police
officer lodged the FIR under the new act BNSS instead of lodging under sec 154 of crpc.
There was no proper identification of any legal violations. Looked into the cases of Honour
killing of Avanthi reddy case, shakti vahini cases. Filed an RTI application addressing the
letter to IG about the conditions prevailed in the open jail. To know about the how many
open jails are there in Telangana, are they making them work as bonded labors and work in
the bunks. What are the categories of work they make them do?, what are the wage payment
and when was it last revised. An anticipatory bail petition was filed in the High Court where
under sec 126 BNS wrongful restraint as the voluntary obstruction of a person, preventing
them from proceeding in any direction they have the right to the offence is punishable by
simple imprisonment. The complainant here in venkanna and his son went to their
agricultural land to sow cotton seeds, there the accused persons wrongfully confined their
tractors and Accused 1 committed murder of him by beating with a fence stick over his head
over land disputes. Under sec 109 BNS for organised crimes.

In this case Oggu Laxmi encroachment of 0.16 Sq yards of d form Patta land for the
construction of panchayat office. In the year 2006 removal of name from revenue records.
The land is of 5.5 Sq yards grave yard near by constructing in the area. No specific
measurements of land shown as to where is her area.

Exhuming of body of the husband for the DNA test of the child to confirm the paternity
test.A shad illicit relation with her prior affair. Demanding property share of the husband and
also the husband's father property.

No cross examination of defendants ( tenants) where done, in the district Court. The plaintiffs
submitted all the related documents showing their ownership in the property but defendants
were not able to proof as didn't submit any docs. Plaintiff executed a gift deed in favor of his
sister. Executed a sale deed, Gift deeds can be cancelled at any time in lower court saying I
have given her when she was in need and now she is trying to sell it.

In this case of Kadire Krishnaiah, who is an advocate by profession an FIR was registered
against him under new provision of BNS sec 299 by the defacto complainant aout a video
clip in the facebook and whatsapp which is criticizing and insulting Lord Venkateshwara.
The complainat was BJP leader who saw that video which is five years old, and that video is
of 1 hr 50 minutes. A petition was filed by my sir for quashing of such FIR under sec 528 of

23
BNSS. As the date of occurrence is fiver years ago, and the petitioner is atheist by nature, if a
religious person has the right to give opinion about his perspective of god, then even the
atheist has the right to express his opinion.

In this case Bail application FIR registered PW1 and 9 circumstantial witness, deceased
succumbed to death dying declaration, deceased doing black Magic motive court proposed to
hear the criminal appeal on 19 /8. Clear disagreement between the parties regards to amounts
where petitioner has to pay the compensation, court directs to seek clarification by filing IA
on the concerned quadrant bench. Both parties enter into a agreement for amount, respondent
not happy with the amount. The respondent should have been paid approx 13 lacs which is
far from the memo, court directs to file an application for seeking clarification.

Forceful relation when agreed to get married refused but saying that you are from lower
caste, threatened her by pulling her in the car and made comments. Gut arrested 165
statement was taken but investigation going on refuse dto grant the bail but court said deposit
20,000 as surety and appearance in front of SHO both are majors.

Violation of 41A- notice given by 22 court. Collected huge cash of crs from complainant, 79
lakhs of property, apartments, 3-4 crs of jewellery properties in kakinada admitted the offense
But if given bail-chances of being fled away. Court ordered to deposit of passport and furnish
sureties and appearance every week in front of SHO twice because husband and wife both
involved in the crime. Wife to appear twice in front of SHO. Eight weeks or till filing of
charge sheet whichever is earlier.

Conclusion

To conclude this report, the analysis of crpc and BNSS, the old criminal law and new
criminal law, in my opinion, the new laws could have been implemented in a more better
way, rather than implementing all the three bills at once, and increasing the workload of the
judiciary, confusing the legal fraternity, general public and public officers, the government
could have implemented in a more phased manner. It is always easy to change the acts or
laws there is no problem in that, but there is always a real challenge in to get these acts
executed properly and to get the court to work effectively. the new laws was brought into
force rather quickly, it should have been imposed in a phase’s manner. They should have
imposed first few provisions of the bill and should have seen how the public is reacting
towards it. Whether there is a positive criticism or negative. The first six months should have
been a trial phase. There was no proper time given to the judiciary system to adapt to the new

24
bills, understand the legal provisions of the bills, provide constructive criticism to the bills,
give commentaries on the new added sections. Analyse what else can be improved, whether
all the sections are according to the constitution and not violating the constitutional rights of
the general public.

REFERENCES:

Statutes:

 Code of Criminal Procedure code, 1973

 The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
 The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Online Databases:
• SCC Online
• Manupatra
• Indian Kannon
• Liveabout.com

25
26