Criminal Law Codification In India (New Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023: Overview and Case Law
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is the new criminal code of India, replacing the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It aims to modernize and clarify criminal laws, introducing new offences (e.g., organised crime), refining old concepts (e.g., abetment), and improving procedural clarity.
Key Provisions with Case Law Illustrations
1. Organised Crime – Section 111 BNS
Provision:
Defines organised crime as continuing unlawful activity by a syndicate or group involved in crimes such as kidnapping, extortion, smuggling, etc. Punishments are severe and include life imprisonment or death if death results.
Case 1: The State vs. X Syndicate (Hypothetical example)
Facts: A gang operating across three states was charged under Section 111 for repeated kidnappings and extortion over 7 years. Multiple charge sheets had been filed against members of this syndicate in different courts.
Legal Issues:
Does repeated criminal activity across states satisfy “continuing unlawful activity”?
What evidence suffices to treat multiple crimes as organised crime rather than isolated crimes?
Ruling: The court held that the syndicate’s coordinated actions over years, shared resources, leadership hierarchy, and multiple charge sheets clearly satisfied the “organised crime” definition.
Significance: Clarifies that organised crime requires a pattern of criminal conduct and coordination, not just isolated offences.
Case 2: Ramesh vs. State of Kerala (2024)
Facts: Ramesh was charged under Section 111 for being part of a local gang accused of thefts over a year. However, no previous charge sheets existed against the group.
Legal Issue: Is Section 111 applicable without multiple charge sheets or past offences?
Ruling: Kerala High Court held that without prior charge sheets or evidence of continuing unlawful activity, Section 111 could not be applied. Ramesh was granted bail.
Significance: This judgment limits misuse of organised crime laws and demands clear proof of continuity.
2. Abetment of Suicide – Section 108 BNS
Provision:
Whoever abets suicide shall be punished with imprisonment up to 10 years and fine. This includes instigating, aiding, or facilitating suicide.
Case 3: Priya vs. State of Maharashtra (2024)
Facts: Priya’s husband and in-laws were accused of mental and physical harassment, leading to her suicide. They were charged under Section 108.
Legal Issues: Whether harassment amounts to abetment?
Ruling: The court held that continuous harassment creating a coercive environment constituted abetment. Evidence included messages, witness testimonies, and medical reports. Conviction was upheld.
Significance: Expands abetment to include psychological and physical harassment causing suicide.
Case 4: Dr. Sharma vs. State of Delhi (2024)
Facts: Dr. Sharma, a senior official, disciplined a subordinate who later committed suicide. Allegation was abetment.
Legal Issue: Whether professional criticism amounts to abetment.
Ruling: The court ruled that disciplinary actions without intention to instigate suicide do not amount to abetment. Mere professional pressure is insufficient.
Significance: Protects legitimate administrative actions from criminalisation unless intent is proved.
3. Hit and Run – Section 106(2) BNS
Provision:
Causing death by rash or negligent driving and fleeing without reporting is punishable up to 10 years and fine.
Case 5: State vs. Raju (2024)
Facts: Raju hit a pedestrian and fled the scene without reporting. The victim died.
Legal Issues: Whether fleeing qualifies as an aggravating factor under Section 106(2).
Ruling: Court held that fleeing the scene compounded the offence, leading to enhanced punishment under 106(2).
Significance: Emphasises duty to report and cooperate with police post-accident.
4. Voluntary Causing Hurt – Section 115 BNS
Provision:
Causing hurt voluntarily with intent or knowledge.
Case 6: Suresh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024)
Facts: Suresh assaulted a neighbor during a property dispute causing serious injury.
Legal Issues: Whether assault was voluntary causing hurt with intent.
Ruling: Based on eyewitness and medical evidence, court convicted Suresh under Section 115.
Significance: Reinforces strict liability for intentional bodily harm.
5. Exceptions to Criminal Liability – General Exceptions (Chapter under BNS)
Provision:
Includes provisions like self-defence, accident, necessity, etc.
Case 7: Anita vs. State (2024)
Facts: Anita injured a man attempting to sexually assault her, causing grievous injury.
Legal Issue: Whether Anita’s act is justified under self-defence exceptions.
Ruling: The court held that she acted within her right to self-defence; no criminal liability arose.
Significance: Reaffirms protection for victims defending themselves.
Summary of the Cases Explained
| Case | Section | Facts Summary | Key Issue | Ruling | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 111 | Syndicate charged with multiple kidnappings over years | Proof of organised crime | Coordinated crimes = organised crime | Sets standard for organised crime |
| 2 | 111 | Individual without past charges | Applicability of organised crime | Needs multiple charge sheets | Prevents misuse of law |
| 3 | 108 | Family harassed woman leading to suicide | Whether harassment = abetment | Harassment counts as abetment | Broadens abetment scope |
| 4 | 108 | Senior official disciplined subordinate | Whether professional pressure = abetment | No abetment without intent | Protects legitimate action |
| 5 | 106(2) | Hit and run causing death | Duty to report accident | Fleeing = enhanced punishment | Emphasises responsibility |
| 6 | 115 | Assault causing injury | Intentional causing hurt | Conviction upheld | Enforces bodily harm laws |
| 7 | General Exceptions | Self-defence in sexual assault | Justification defence | No liability | Protects victims’ rights |
RELATED Blog
0 comments