Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Deepu VS State of U. P. - Crimes
"], ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 544"].Deepu VS State of U. P. - Crimes
"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 40198"].The law also clarifies that offences under IPC are replaced by corresponding provisions in BNS (e.g., Section 354 IPC corresponds to Section 74 BNS), and references to IPC in schedules or legal references should be read as references to BNS, in accordance with the General Clauses Act ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 928"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 25690"].
Main Points and Insights:
Deepu VS State of U. P. - Crimes
"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 40198"].The law also emphasizes that references to IPC in legal documents or schedules should be interpreted as references to BNS, ensuring legal consistency ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 25690"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
Deepu VS State of U. P. - Crimes
"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 40198"].
In the evolving landscape of Indian criminal law, the transition from the to the , has raised critical questions about retrospective application. A common query arises: Ex Post Facto Law IPC now BNS Application—can new provisions under BNS be applied to offenses committed before its enactment on ? This blog post delves into the constitutional safeguards, judicial precedents, and practical implications, helping you navigate this complex area.
Understanding is essential, especially with recent legislative reforms. These laws generally prohibit or harsher penalties, but beneficial changes may apply. Let's break it down step by step.
refer to legislation applied retrospectively to criminal matters. explicitly protects against this: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
The has clarified: every ex post facto law... must necessarily be retrospective, but every retrospective law is not an ex post facto law — the distinction hinges on whether the law creates or aggravates offences or penalties 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088. Thus, not all retrospective laws violate the Constitution.
Article 20(1) acts as a bulwark against retrospective criminal laws. Courts have consistently held that:- Laws creating new offences retrospectively are unconstitutional 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088.- Laws increasing punishments for existing offenses are prohibited 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3840.- However, laws reducing punishments or clarifying existing offences are permissible and can benefit the accused in pending cases 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3840.
In , the Court emphasized that the prohibition extends to conviction or punishment under such laws 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088. Similarly, reinforced that beneficial amendments apply retroactively 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088.
The key test: Does the law create a new offence, aggravate it, or merely mitigate? The requires that even ex post facto law of such a type should be applied to mitigate the rigour of the law 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088.
The IPC has been repealed and replaced by BNS, effective . For offenses committed before this date, the applicability hinges on whether BNS provisions:- Create new offences: Prohibited if applied retrospectively.- Enhance penalties: Violates Article 20(1).- Reduce punishments or clarify: Generally applicable to pending cases.
Recent cases illustrate this. In a PMLA matter, the court held that references to IPC in the to corresponding BNS sections: The PMLA's references to IPC provisions should be read as corresponding provisions under the new law; the implications of the clarified that references in former laws to re-enacted statutes 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 997. This ensures continuity without creating new offenses.
Another ruling affirmed: BNS, 2023 does not render the PMLA otiose with respect to offences committed post-July 2024 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 997, emphasizing interpretive adaptation rather than retrospective penalization.
Indian courts have shaped this doctrine:- Laws reducing penalties: If the law reduces the punishment for an offence, the accused shall have the benefit of such reduced punishment 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3840.- Clarificatory laws: Permissible, as they do not alter the offense's substance 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 471.- Distinction from mere retrospectivity: The distinction between retrospective laws and is crucial. The former may be permissible if they are beneficial or clarificatory 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 125.
In NDPS cases, the noted: Article 20(1) gets attracted only when any penalises with i.e. when an act was not an offence when it was committed 2015 0 Supreme(SC) 316. Continuing offenses at enactment time do not trigger violations.
Post-BNS cases highlight practical application:- In a bail application under (corresponding to ), proceedings were quashed for insufficient evidence of attempt to murder, without retrospective issues 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31542.- Bail granted in serious BNS offenses with Atrocities Act, balancing liberty and investigation, subject to conditions 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 46344.- Another case under allowed bail considering custody duration 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 45832.
These demonstrate BNS's application to post-enactment matters, with ex post facto principles guiding pre-enactment cases.
In wildlife law contexts, courts have reiterated: what is prohibited under Article 20 is only conviction or sentence under an 'ex post facto' law and not the trial thereof 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 81.
However, procedural changes or trials under new laws are generally allowed, as long as substantive rights remain protected.
Courts favor accused-friendly interpretations: an ex post facto law which only mollifies the rigour of a criminal law does not fall within the said prohibition 2003 0 Supreme(MP) 568.
The shift from IPC to BNS does not upend ex post facto principles. Amendments reducing punishments or clarifying offenses typically apply retrospectively, benefiting the accused, while those creating new crimes or harsher penalties do not. As seen in PMLA adaptations and bail grants, dynamic interpretation ensures legal continuity 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 997.
Key Takeaways:- Prohibited: New offenses or increased penalties retrospectively 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088.- Permitted: Reduced punishments or clarifications 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3840.- Always assess via Article 20(1) test.
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on judicial precedents and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance. Laws and interpretations may evolve.
References:1. 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2088: Scope of .2. 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3840: Beneficial amendments.3. 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 997: PMLA-BNS continuity.4. Others as cited inline.
#ExPostFactoLaw #IPCtoBNS #Article20
BNS reads as under: BNS which expressly provides that repeal of IPC does not affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability which has been acquired, accrued or incurred under IPC & Section 358 (2)(e) of a href="./..
In this context it is necessary to notice that what is prohibited under Article 20 is only conviction or sentence under an 'ex post facto' law and not the trial thereof. ... There is no gainsaying that BNSS is essentially a criminal procedural law whereas BNS provides for substantive criminal law. ... This interpretation draws further credence from perusal of Section 358(2)(b) of BNS which expressly provides that repeal of IPC does not affect any rig....
BNS , 2023 does not render the PMLA otiose with respect to offences committed post- July 2024. ... Accordingly, the application stands rejected. ... In any event, learned PP urged that no case for bail is made out on facts or in law, and the application deserves to be rejected outright. ... There is no clause in the PMLA saying that an offence must be under the IPC and no other law to qualify, the IPC was mentioned because it was the operative penal ....
On 23.7.2024 the following order was passed: “The impugned FIR dated 3.7.2024 is registered under the provision of Indian Penal Code and not under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) which came into force on 1st July, 2024. ... Effect of Repeal of I.P.C. and Cr.P.C. and enforcement of new Criminal Laws (BNS and BNSS) was also considered by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of XXXX Vs. ... However, any appeal/application/revision/petition filed upto 30.06.2024 under the provision....
Indian Penal Code , 1860 (for short ‘ IPC ’) and Sections 69, 332(c) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’). 3. ... After the investigation was completed, the final report has been filed wherein the offence under Section 69 of BNS has been deleted, and the offences alleged are now only under Sections 450 , 376(2)(n) and 323 of IPC . ... A copy of the statement of the de facto complainant was handed over across the Bar by the learned Public P....
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS' for short) [corresponding to Section 307 of IPC], now pending as S.C.No.249 of 2025 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court (POCSO), Kozhikode. ... glass door of the room towards the de facto complainant, resulting in the glass pane shattering and the broken pieces of glass piercing the de facto complainant's chest. ... Here, the allegation is that, upon the de facto complainant trying to enter the room where the petitioner was standing, there occurred an altercation an....
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS ) along with Section 3 (2) (va) of the Atrocities Act, 1989. ... If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the prosecution may file an application before this Court for cancellation of bail. ... The first appellant is the son-in-law of the 2nd appellant. The allegation is that at about 1.30 a.m. on 29-07-2025, the appellants contacted the de facto complainant through the wife of the 1st appellant, since they had a grudge against him.
The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that he is involved in 11 other crimes, including an offence under Section 302 IPC. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’). 3. ... In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having ... ....
General Clauses Act, 1897, and the notification S.O.2970(E) dated 16.07.2024 of the Ministry of Law and Justice, reference to Section 354 of Indian Penal Code in the schedule of the Act shall be read as reference to Section 74 of the BNS, 2023. ... In the schedule to the Act, reference is made to the offences under the Indian Penal Code. The Indian Penal Code was repealed by the Act 45 of 2023. The .15. penal provisions in the IPC were re-enacted in the BNS. ... In th....
The corresponding penal provision in the BNS is Section 74. Section 74 BNS is in pari materia with Section 354 IPC. ... In the schedule to the Act, reference is made to the offences under the Indian Penal Code. The Indian Penal Code was repealed by the Act 45 of 2023. The penal provisions in the IPC were re-enacted in the BNS. ... Therefore, in view of Section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and the notification S.O.2970(E) dated 16.07.2024 of the Ministry of #HL_....
“The principle “Ex post facto” law is also known as “Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali' embodied in our supreme law, the Constitution of India also outspreads and protects positively the eventualities happened in this prosecution. For example, when a law repeals a previous law, the repealed legislation no longer applies to the situations it once did, even if such situations arose before the law was repealed. A law may have an ex post facto effect without being technically ex post facto.
The Article prohibits application of ex post facto law. State of Vindhya Pradesh, while dealing with the import under Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India, the Court stated what has been prohibited under the said Article is the conviction and sentence in a criminal proceeding under ex post facto law and not the trial thereof. Article 20(1) gets attracted only when any penal law penalises with retrospective effect i.e. when an act was not an offence when it was committed and additionally the persons cannot be subjected to penalty greater than that which might have been....
The Article prohibits application of ex post facto law. The Constitution Bench has held that:- "9.... what is prohibited under Article 20 is only conviction or sentence under an 'ex post facto' law and not the trial thereof. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:- Article 20(1) gets attracted only when any penal law penalises with retrospective effect i.e. when an act was not an offence when it was committed and additionally the persons cannot be subjected to penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of commission of the ....
Article 20(1) gets attracted only when any penal law penalises with retrospective effect i.e. when an act was not an offence when it was committed and additionally the persons cannot be subjected to penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of commission of the offence. The Article prohibits application of ex post facto law. The Constitution Bench has held that:- “.... what is prohibited under Article 20 is only conviction or sentence under an ‘ex post facto’ law and not the trial thereof. In Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh and Anr.....
Every ex post facto law is necessarily retrospective. Every law that takes away or impairs a vested right is retrospective. Under Art. 20 of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of that act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. But an ex post facto law which only mollifies the rigour of a criminal law does not fall within the said prohibition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
