Old IPC Case or New BNS Case: Which Law Applies to Your FIR

Which law applies: the date of the offence or the date of the FIR?

Both, for different purposes. Substantive criminal law, meaning what the offence is and what punishment it carries, depends on the date the act was committed. Article 20(1) of the Constitution says no one can be convicted except for violating a law in force when the act was done, or given a penalty greater than the one that law allowed. So an act done in March 2024 is an IPC offence, even if the FIR is lodged in 2026.

Procedure is different. Procedural law generally applies from the day it comes into force, unless the new law says otherwise. Section 531 BNSS says otherwise for one class of cases: any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is to be disposed of under the CrPC as if the BNSS had not come into force. Everything that begins after that date runs under the BNSS.

Evidence follows the same pattern. Section 170 BSA repeals the Indian Evidence Act 1872 but saves any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal pending before 1 July 2024, which continue to be dealt with under the old Act. So in an old FIR, an electronic record still needs a section 65B certificate; in a new FIR, it needs a certificate under section 63 BSA, as our post on the section 63 BSA certificate explains.

Six common situations and the law that applies

Find the row that matches your case. Where two laws are shown, the first governs the offence and the second the procedure.

Offence before July 2024 but FIR after: what happens?

This is the most common mixed case, and the answer is now fairly settled. The offence is charged under the IPC, because that was the law on the date of the act. The FIR itself is registered under section 173 BNSS, the investigation runs under the BNSS, and the trial will run under the BNSS and the BSA.

So the FIR should read, for example, "section 420 IPC" rather than "section 318(4) BNS" for a cheating that took place in early 2024, even though it was registered in 2025. In practice, Delhi Police FIRs sometimes cite BNS sections for older conduct, either by mistake or because the date of occurrence is unclear. That is a correctable error, discussed below, but it should be raised early.

The procedural consequence is often helpful to the accused. A complaint case filed after 1 July 2024 gets the protection of section 223 BNSS, under which the magistrate must give the accused an opportunity of being heard before taking cognizance. A preliminary enquiry of up to 14 days may be conducted under section 173(3) for offences punishable with three to seven years. And a notice of appearance under section 35, explained in our post on the section 35 BNSS notice, replaces the old section 41A notice.

Reporting an older incident now: what changes for the complainant?

A person who goes to the police today about something that happened before 1 July 2024 uses the new procedure. The complaint can be made at any police station as a zero FIR, or online as an e-FIR to be signed within three days, under section 173 BNSS; our post on zero FIR and e-FIR explains how that works. The FIR should still cite the IPC sections that fit the conduct.

If the police refuse to register, the remedies are also the new ones. The complainant first approaches the Superintendent of Police or, in Delhi, the DCP of the district under section 173(4), and then the magistrate under section 175(3), with an affidavit supporting the application. The magistrate may ask for the police officer's report before ordering investigation. These steps did not exist in this form under section 156(3) CrPC, and skipping them is a common reason applications are returned.

Delay matters more than people expect. Section 514 BNSS, like section 468 CrPC before it, bars a court from taking cognizance after a set period for minor offences: six months for offences punishable with fine only, one year for those punishable with imprisonment up to one year, and three years for those punishable with imprisonment up to three years. There is no such bar for more serious offences. The period is counted by the punishment for the IPC offence, so a complaint about an old assault or threat may already be out of time unless the court extends it for good reason.

Old conduct reported late also faces a practical problem: evidence. CCTV footage is overwritten within weeks, call records are kept for limited periods, and witnesses forget. A complainant reporting an older incident should collect and preserve everything available before going to the police, and say plainly in the complaint why the report was delayed.

My FIR was registered before 1 July 2024. Does the CrPC still apply?

Yes, for the investigation and trial. Courts have consistently read section 531(2)(a) BNSS to mean that an investigation pending on 1 July 2024 continues under the CrPC, and the trial that follows the chargesheet is also conducted under the CrPC, even if the chargesheet was filed later. The Bombay and Rajasthan High Courts, among others, took this view in 2024.

What remains disputed is the status of new applications and appeals filed after 1 July 2024 in such old cases. The Delhi High Court said in July 2024 that only proceedings actually pending on that date continue under the CrPC, so a bail application filed afterwards should be under the BNSS. The Kerala High Court took a similar view for appeals filed after that date. Other courts have treated such filings as part of the pending proceeding and continued with the CrPC.

The difference rarely changes the outcome, because most provisions were carried over with the same substance. Bail under section 439 CrPC and section 483 BNSS, anticipatory bail under section 438 CrPC and section 482 BNSS, and quashing under section 482 CrPC and section 528 BNSS are close equivalents. The practical approach in Delhi courts is to cite the BNSS provision and mention the CrPC equivalent in brackets, so that the court can treat the application under whichever law it holds applicable.

IPC to BNS: the sections people ask about most

These are the common equivalents. The offences are similar but not always identical, so read the BNS section itself when you rely on it.

The procedural codes have their own conversion. The CrPC sections people meet most often map as follows: 154 to 173 (FIR), 156(3) to 175(3), 41A to 35, 167 to 187, 436A to 479, 437 to 480, 438 to 482, 439 to 483, and 482 to 528.

What if the police have used the wrong law in the FIR?

A wrong section in an FIR is not fatal, but it should be corrected before it reaches the charge. An FIR is the starting point of the investigation, not the charge; the police can and do alter sections during investigation, and the chargesheet should cite the correct law. The court then frames the charge under the law applicable to the date of the offence.

The real risk is not the citation but the consequences that flow from it. If an older act is registered under a BNS section that carries a higher punishment than the IPC section did, the bail court may treat the case as more serious than it is. If a new BNS offence that had no IPC equivalent, such as organised crime under section 111 or snatching under section 304, is applied to conduct before 1 July 2024, that offence simply cannot stand for that conduct.

When Advocate B.K. Singh is handed a new FIR, one of the first things he checks is the date and time of occurrence written in the FIR, against the sections cited. A mismatch is raised at the first bail hearing, in a written note, and again at the stage of charge. Courts are generally willing to correct it because the law treats an error in stating the section as immaterial unless the accused has been misled, but the correction has to be asked for.

If the charge has already been framed under the wrong code, the trial is not lost. A criminal court can alter or add to a charge at any time before judgment, and the accused is then given a chance to respond and, where needed, to recall witnesses. Apply for the alteration as soon as the error is noticed, because an objection raised for the first time in the final arguments, after all the evidence has been led on the wrong footing, gets a far colder reception.

What about continuing offences that started before July 2024 and went on after?

Some offences are made up of a course of conduct: cruelty in a marriage, a series of payments in a cheating case, repeated stalking or threats. When the conduct runs across 1 July 2024, the first question is when each offence was complete. A cheating is generally complete when property is delivered on a dishonest inducement; each delivery can be a separate offence. Cruelty may be a continuing state of affairs.

Police in such cases sometimes cite both the IPC and BNS sections in the same FIR, for example section 498A IPC and section 85 BNS. That is not wrong in itself, but the charge must separate the periods properly so that no act before 1 July 2024 is punished under a BNS provision. For a husband's family facing such a case, our post on cruelty cases under section 85 BNS discusses the defence in more detail.

In practice, where the conduct is largely before the change-over date, prosecutors tend to frame the charge under the IPC, and where it is largely after, under the BNS. The defence should check that the evidence for the later period is real and not added only to bring in a BNS provision.

How to work out which law applies to your case

You can do most of this from the FIR and the chargesheet. Take a copy of each and go through these steps.

1. Find the date of occurrence

   The FIR records the date and time of the incident separately from the date of registration. Note both. If the conduct runs over a period, note the first and last dates the complaint mentions.

2. Decide the substantive law

   If every act is before 1 July 2024, the IPC applies. If every act is on or after it, the BNS applies. If the acts span the date, mark which act falls on which side.

3. Decide the procedural law

   If the FIR was registered, or the complaint filed, before 1 July 2024, the investigation and trial run under the CrPC. If it was registered after, they run under the BNSS.

4. Check the sections cited

   Compare the sections in the FIR and chargesheet with your answers above. Look for BNS sections cited for older conduct, or new BNS offences that did not exist before.

5. Choose the provision for your next filing

   For bail, anticipatory bail, quashing, discharge or appeal, cite the provision that matches the procedural law, with the equivalent in brackets where courts have differed.

6. Raise any mismatch in writing

   Put the correction in a written note at the bail hearing and in your discharge or charge arguments. Ask the court to record the correct law in the order sheet.

Does the date affect bail, police custody and anticipatory bail?

Yes, in small but real ways. The bail provisions in the BNSS largely mirror the CrPC, but some details changed. Section 187 BNSS allows police custody of up to fifteen days to be taken in parts during the first 40 or 60 days of detention. Under the CrPC, courts generally confined police custody to the first fifteen days after arrest. For an old FIR still running under the CrPC, that difference can matter at a remand hearing.

The undertrial release rule changed too. Section 479 BNSS added release after one-third of the maximum sentence for first-time offenders, and the Supreme Court has proceeded on the basis that this applies to older cases as well; see our post on undertrial release under section 479. The default bail periods of 60 and 90 days remain the same under both codes.

For anticipatory bail, section 482 BNSS keeps the bar on anticipatory bail in certain rape cases involving young girls that the CrPC carried after 2018. The rest of the test is unchanged. Our post on anticipatory bail in Delhi covers the procedure; the bail page at our bail practice covers the types of bail.

Can I get the benefit of a lighter punishment under the new law?

Sometimes, but do not assume it. Article 20(1) only forbids a heavier penalty than the one in force at the time of the act; it does not by itself give the accused the benefit of a later, lighter one. Section 358 BNS, the repeal and savings clause, keeps alive any penalty or punishment incurred under the IPC, and any proceeding for it, as if the IPC had not been repealed.

There is older authority from the Supreme Court that an accused may claim the benefit of a later law that reduces the punishment for an offence, on the basis that beneficial changes can be applied to pending cases. Whether and how that applies to the BNS is something courts decide case by case, and the savings clause is a significant obstacle. If a BNS provision carries a lower maximum for your conduct, raise it at sentencing rather than building the defence on it.

The reverse is clear. Where the BNS increased the punishment, for example by adding a minimum sentence, or created a new offence, it cannot be applied to acts before 1 July 2024.

Quashing, discharge and appeals in old IPC cases

A petition to quash an old IPC FIR is filed in the Delhi High Court under section 528 BNSS, with section 482 CrPC mentioned as the equivalent, if filed after 1 July 2024. The grounds are the same as before: no offence disclosed on the face of the FIR, a civil dispute dressed up as a crime, or settlement in a suitable case. Our post on quashing an FIR after a compromise explains the settlement route.

A discharge application in a trial still running under the CrPC is filed under the CrPC provisions (sections 227 or 239), because the trial is a pending proceeding under section 531. In a new BNSS trial, the matching provisions are sections 250 and 262, which now set a 60-day period from committal or from the supply of documents for filing a discharge application.

Appeals and revisions follow the procedural law that the court holds applicable, and the time limits are the same. Our post on criminal appeal or revision covers which remedy fits which order.

Special laws: NDPS, PMLA, IT Act and others

Special criminal statutes were not repealed on 1 July 2024. The NDPS Act, the PMLA, the IT Act, the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Prevention of Corruption Act and others continue with their own offences and punishments. What changed for them is the general procedural code that fills the gaps, which is now the BNSS for proceedings started after the change-over date.

So a cheque bounce complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed in 2025 is tried under the NI Act with the BNSS as the general procedure, and electronic evidence is proved under the BSA. A PMLA case where the ECIR and complaint are new follows the PMLA and the BNSS. The offence itself is unaffected by the 1 July date, unless the FIR also cites IPC or BNS offences, in which case the usual date rule applies to those offences.

One area to watch is where special laws refer to sections of the old codes by number. Courts read those references as references to the corresponding new provisions, under the general rule for repealed enactments, but expect argument where the new provision differs.

Mistakes people make with old and new criminal law

The first mistake is assuming that the date of the FIR decides everything. It decides procedure, not the offence. The second is the reverse: assuming that an old offence means old procedure, when the FIR was registered after 1 July 2024 and the BNSS applies.

Others are smaller but costly. Applications cite a CrPC section in a BNSS case and are returned by the registry for correction, losing a date. Electronic evidence is proved with the wrong certificate. A new BNS offence is accepted at the charge stage without objection for conduct that predates it. And people rely on BNS changes, such as new time limits, in a case that is still running under the CrPC.

None of these is hard to avoid if the two dates are checked at the start. The work is ten minutes with the FIR, and it shapes every filing that follows.

Check these on your FIR today

If the dates and sections do not match, raise it before the next hearing. The team of Advocate B.K. Singh can read your FIR and chargesheet and tell you which law and which provision apply; send them through our enquiry page or see our page on Delhi's criminal courts.

• Date and time of occurrence, as written in the FIR
• Date and time of registration of the FIR
• Whether any act alleged falls on or after 1 July 2024
• Sections cited: IPC, BNS or both
• Any BNS-only offence cited for conduct before 1 July 2024
• Which procedural code your next application should cite
• Which evidence certificate applies to electronic records in your case
• Whether a special law also applies and has its own procedure