Topic
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNS) is India's new criminal procedure code replacing the CrPC, governing arrest, bail, trial, and investigation processes under modernized legal standards.
The Madras HC upheld writ courts' review jurisdiction under Article 226 via HC Writ Rules, ruling that a proposed accused has no pre-FIR hearing right. It also held the State may withdraw a legally untenable review without breaching rule of law, bolstering prosecutorial discretion in PMLA and corruption matters.
Bombay HC held that a Special Judge under the PC Act loses cognizance jurisdiction once the charge-sheet omits corruption offences. The transferee magistrate must pass fresh cognizance and remand orders under the BNSS; failure renders detention illegal. Two accused were released where the CBI charge-sheet dropped PC Act charges but the Special Judge retained the file without valid BNSS remand orders.
Delhi HC struck down trial court's prior permission condition for foreign travel, holding it cannot stand without bail, cognizance or summons; instead, two weeks' prior intimation suffices. This shields Article 21 travel rights for those not yet arrested or summoned.
Section 348 BNSS allows summoning any witness whose evidence is essential for a just decision, even if not in charge-sheet, Uttarakhand HC held. It overturned the trial court’s refusal and ordered production of Malkhana Moharrir and original register.
A Punjab-Haryana High Court judgment bars police from directing any further inquiry after a cancellation report unless a magistrate authorises it under Section 173(8) CrPC and Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. This limits police powers, ensuring judicial oversight of post-report investigations and protecting accused persons from unwarranted extensions of inquiry.
Jharkhand HC quashed the order requiring an Rs 8 lakh security for releasing a seized Maruti Baleno, directing that only a reasonable indemnity bond be furnished. The decision enforces proportionality under Section 528 BNSS, shielding vehicle owners from arbitrary financial demands.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a conviction recorded after the alleged offence cannot be counted as a prior conviction under Section 31 of the NDPS Act, so enhanced punishment cannot be imposed. Only convictions existing before the offence date qualify, impacting NDPS prosecutions with multiple cases.
Punjab & Haryana HC ruled that under Sec 483 BNS, bail is the default and pre-trial detention cannot serve as a substitute for sentencing, even in serious offences. The decision protects accused from unnecessary incarceration while trial is pending, reinforcing the right to liberty.
The court ruled that disclosure statements excluded by Section 23 BSA cannot sustain detention absent any recovery or FIR mention. Granting parity with bailed co-accused, it allowed regular bail under BNSS Section 483, stressing that indefinite pre-trial incarceration is impermissible at the early trial stage.
The Uttarakhand High Court set aside the charge-sheet and all criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita because the parties reached a voluntary settlement, even though the offence under Section 109 is non-compoundable. This establishes that a genuine settlement can override non-compoundability, guiding future compounding applications.
The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside the magistrate’s orders remanding Jitesh Anand to police and judicial custody, declaring his arrest unlawful for breaching Article 22(2) and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The decision underscores that any detention without a valid transit remand is unconstitutional, mandating immediate release on bail.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court rejected a petition to quash an extortion FIR, ruling that a private settlement cannot extinguish liability for non-compoundable offences under Section 528 of the BNSS. This clarifies that compromise is ineffective where the offence is non-compoundable, affecting victims and accused in similar cases.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the petition under Section 528 of the BNS Act, holding that a civil property dispute cannot be criminalised and must be pursued in a civil forum. This limits the use of Section 528 to genuine criminal matters, affecting parties seeking FIRs over ownership conflicts.
The Supreme Court ruled that the statutory absolute limit on police-custody duration under the BNSS is invalid, allowing police to question accused persons outside prison premises. However, the right of an accused to have an advocate present is confined to narrowly defined situations, reshaping investigative practice nationwide.
Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) quashed a non-bailable warrant against an accused for a single-day absence, ruling that issuance without exhausting alternatives under BNS 528 breaches personal liberty. The court emphasized strict compliance with statutory safeguards and precedents on inherent powers to quash warrants.