The enactment and enforcement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), effective July 1, 2024, marks the most fundamental overhaul of Indian criminal procedure since the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was overhauled in 1973. Approaching its second anniversary in 2026, the BNSS has transitioned from legislative theory to binding courtroom practice.

The BNSS supersedes the CrPC with a structural realignment—increasing the number of sections from 484 to 531—aimed at addressing systemic backlog, integrating modern digital infrastructure, and shifting the procedural focus from a strictly adversarial model to a more victim-centric framework. This article provides a doctrinal and procedural comparative analysis in the broader framework of BNSS vs CrPC, integrating recent judicial pronouncements and operational realities as of 2026.

Fir Registration And Investigative Framework

The BNSS vs CrPC comparison is most visible in the area of FIR registration and investigation procedures. The BNSS formally recognises Zero FIR, e-FIR, and preliminary enquiry through statutory provisions, introducing greater procedural clarity and digital integration into criminal investigations.

2.1 Statutory Recognition of e-FIR and Zero FIR

• CrPC Framework (Section 154): The CrPC mandated the immediate registration of a First Information Report (FIR) for cognisable offences. However, “Zero FIR” (registering an FIR outside the jurisdictional police station) was an administrative and judicial creation (e.g., Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.), lacking explicit statutory backing. Electronic FIRs were merely administrative directives.
• BNSS Framework (Section 173): Section 173 completely reorganises the FIR framework. It grants absolute statutory recognition to the Zero FIR, mandating that information can be given at any police station regardless of the area where the offence was committed. Furthermore, e-FIRs are statutorily mandated, allowing information to be given via electronic communication, provided it is physically signed within three days.

2.2 Formalisation of Preliminary Enquiry

• CrPC: Preliminary enquiries were governed by judicial precedents (notably the Lalita Kumari guidelines) to ascertain whether a cognisable offence was made out.
• BNSS [Section 173(3)]: Introduces a statutory right for police to conduct a preliminary enquiry within 14 daysbefore registering an FIR for offences punishable with imprisonment of 3 to 7 years. This enquiry requires prior permission from an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP).

Arrest, Remand, And Custodial Jurisprudence

The BNSS vs CrPC distinction becomes particularly important in matters of arrest, police custody, and remand, where the BNSS significantly expands investigative powers while simultaneously introducing statutory safeguards against indiscriminate arrests.

3.1 The Expansion of Police Custody Remand

• CrPC Framework (Section 167): Under the CrPC, as interpreted by the Supreme Court (e.g., CBI v. Anupam J. Kulkarni), police custody could only be granted during the first 15 days of remand. Any custody thereafter, up to the 60 or 90-day limit, had to be strictly judicial custody.
• BNSS Framework (Section 187): The BNSS alters this long-standing principle. Section 187 permits the 15-day police custody to be sought in parts or intervals at any time during the initial 40 days (for offences carrying up to 10 years imprisonment) or 60 days (for offences carrying more than 10 years, life, or death). This significantly expands investigative powers and fundamentally alters bail strategies during the first two months of detention.

3.2 Protections Against Indiscriminate Arrest

• BNSS (Section 35): Codifying the Supreme Court’s mandate in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the BNSS restricts arrests for offences punishable with less than three years, particularly for persons aged above 60 or those severely infirm. Such arrests now require the prior written permission of an officer not below the rank of DySP.

Mandatory Timelines And Courtroom Procedures

The CrPC was heavily criticised for its failure to impose strict statutory deadlines, leading to the collapse of the district trial docket. The BNSS forces trial velocity through explicit statutory mandates:

1. Framing of Charges: Charges must be framed within 60 days from the date of the first hearing on charge.
2. Pronouncement of Judgment: Upon conclusion of arguments, a Sessions Court must pronounce the judgment within 30 days (extendable to 45 days with recorded reasons).
3. Bail Adjudication: Magistrates are statutorily required to decide bail applications within 7 days of filing.
4. Committal Proceedings: Must be completed within 90 days.

Overhaul of Summary Trials And The 2025 Supreme Court Directions

The BNSS massively expands the scope of summary trials to clear docket congestion, replacing Sections 260-265 of the CrPC with Sections 283-288 of the BNSS.

• The Threshold Jump: Under the CrPC, summary trials for offences like theft or receiving stolen property were capped at a property value of ₹200. Under Section 283 BNSS, this threshold has seen a 100x increase to ₹20,000.
• Expanded Scope: Magistrates now have the discretion to summarily try offences punishable with imprisonment up to three years (increased from the two-year cap under CrPC).
• 2026 Jurisprudential Impact: As clarified by the Supreme Court in the landmark 2025 ruling Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar (2025 INSC 1158), this massive expansion pulls tens of thousands of pending cases into the summary track, fundamentally altering the daily practice of Magistrate courts and standardising a five-step rapid adjudication process.

Technological And Forensic Integration

The BNSS effectively transitions the Indian criminal justice system from a paper-based colonial relic to a digitally native framework:

• Audio-Visual Search and Seizure (Section 105 BNSS): It is now a mandatory statutory requirement to record the entire process of search and seizure operations (including the preparation of the seizure memo) via audio-video electronic means. Failure to do so impacts the evidentiary admissibility of the recovery.
• Mandatory Forensics (Section 176 BNSS): For offences punishable with 7 years imprisonment or more, it is mandatory for a forensic expert to visit the crime scene and collect evidence.
• Virtual Trials (Section 530 BNSS): The Sanhita explicitly permits trials, inquiries, and recording of evidence (including witness depositions and cross-examinations) to be held entirely in electronic mode. The Central Government’s operationalisation of the Nyaya-Shruti portal in 2026 has standardised virtual appearances for accused persons, experts, and police officials across jurisdictions.

Trials In Absentia And Proclaimed Offenders

• CrPC Limitation: The CrPC allowed recording evidence in the absence of an absconding accused (Section 299) but did not permit the conclusion of a trial and pronouncement of judgment in their absence.
• BNSS Innovation: To prevent fugitives from frustrating the justice delivery mechanism, the BNSS introduces a full-fledged mechanism for trials in absentia. If a proclaimed offender fails to appear within 90 days of charge framing, the trial can proceed, evidence can be appreciated, and a conviction and sentence can be passed without the accused’s physical presence.

Conclusion

The procedural evolution from the CrPC 1973 to the BNSS 2023 represents a paradigm shift in Indian corporate and criminal litigation. As of 2026, the dual-system reality—managing legacy CrPC trials alongside the accelerated, tech-enabled BNSS framework—demands a sophisticated understanding of both substantive rights and procedural timelines. This BNSS vs CrPC transition has become central to modern criminal litigation strategy in India. For corporate entities and their directors, the expanded scope of police remand, the stringent timelines for trial, and the digitization of evidence require immediate updates to internal compliance, forensic readiness, and litigation strategies.

Disclaimer: This publication is intended strictly for educational and informational purposes in compliance with the rules of the Bar Council of India. It does not constitute legal advice, solicitation, or the establishment of an attorney-client relationship. For precise statutory interpretations or case-specific regulatory compliance, consultation with qualified legal counsel is advised.

The post Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (Bnss), 2023 Vs. Code Of Criminal Procedure (Crpc), 1973: A Comprehensive Statutory And Procedural Comparison (Updated 2026) appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.

Introduction 

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Anurag Bhatnagar v. State (NCT of Delhi) (25 July 2025) has redrawn the roadmap for getting a First Information Report (FIR) registered. At the same time, India’s new procedural code — the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) — has overhauled the statutory mechanics of FIRs with fresh concepts like e-FIR, Zero-FIR and the legally recognised preliminary enquiry. This article unpacks the judgment, analyses the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) and the BNSS, and provides a step-by-step guide to FIR registration in 2025.

Overview

The Supreme Court has clarified that a magistrate should not ordinarily entertain a direct application under Section 156(3) CrPC unless the complainant has first exhausted the two-tier police remedy under Section 154(1) and (3). Simultaneously, BNSS Section 173 recasts FIR practice, introducing electronic filing and statutory recognition for Zero-FIRs and preliminary enquiries. This article explains the dual framework, offers practical filing tips, and contrasts CrPC versus BNSS procedures.

The Supreme Court’s July 2025 Decision

Key Facts

• Case: Anurag Bhatnagar & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
• Bench: Justices Pankaj Mithal & S.V.N. Bhatti.
• Context: Complaint filed directly under Section 156(3) without first approaching Station House Officer (SHO) or Superintendent of Police (SP).

Core Holdings

The Classical CrPC Framework

Sequential Remedies Under CrPC

Failure to follow Steps 1-2 makes a direct S. 156(3) plea “irregular”, not void, but courts may dismiss it[1].

BNSS 2023: A New FIR Architecture

Section 173 – Five Game-Changing Elements

CrPC vs BNSS: A Side-by-Side Snapshot

“Sub-Section (3) … is a significant departure from Section 154 of the CrPC.”[2]

Step-by-Step Guide to FIR Registration in 2025

1. Collect Basic Data

Prepare offence date, place, accused details (if known), witness list, documentary/proof material, and your ID proof.

2. Choose Filing Mode (BNSS-Era Options)

• Physical FIR: Walk into any police station (Zero-FIR concept removes jurisdiction barrier).
• e-FIR: Upload complaint via State/UT online portal or email to SHO; sign within 3 days.
• Helpline / Telephone: Record becomes FIR only after written/e-signed confirmation.

3. Demand the FIR Number

Under BNSS s.173(2) the informant must receive a free copy instantly.

4. If SHO Refuses

1. Send a written complaint to the SP/DCP by post or email (BNSS s.173(4)).
2. Track acknowledgment; keep postal receipt/email log.

5. If SP/DCP Fails

• File a sworn application under Section 156(3) CrPC (still applicable despite BNSS) before the jurisdictional Magistrate.
• Attach (i) copy of complaint to SHO, (ii) copy of letter/email to SP, (iii) affidavit of truth, (iv) supporting documents.

6. Alternative: Private Complaint

Proceed under Section 190 CrPC; Magistrate takes cognisance after recording of statement under Section 200.

Practical Drafting Tips for the Section 156(3) Application

1. Chronology: Clearly date each police approach.[3]

2. Affidavit: Follow Priyanka Srivastava requirement to deter frivolous filings .[3]

3. Relief Clause: Explicitly pray for registration of FIR and monitored investigation.

4. Annexures: Serial-number and paginate every document.

5. Court Fee: Check State amendments (some require nominal fees).

Tables for Quick Reference

Table 1: Remedies Ladder – From SHO to High Court

Table 2: Major FIR-Related Innovations in BNSS

Draft Sample Complaint Templates

A. Police Station Complaint Format (Physical or Email)

To
The Station House Officer
[Police Station Name & Address]

Subject: Information regarding cognizable offence under Sections 420/406 BNS

Sir/Madam,
I, [Name, age, address], state as follows:
1. On 12 July 2025 at 10:30 AM…
2. The accused, [details]…
3. Offence description…

Kindly register an FIR under Section 173 BNSS and investigate.
Attached: Evidence list (Annexures A-D).

Thank you,
[Signature / digital signature]
[Contact]

B. Section 156(3) Application Skeleton

IN THE COURT OF THE Ld. [Chief Metropolitan Magistrate]
[District & State]

Application under Section 156(3) CrPC read with Section 173 BNSS

Applicant: [Name & address]
Versus
Respondent: State (through SHO, …)

Most respectfully submitted:
1. FIR refusal dated… enclosed as Annexure P-1.
2. SP representation dated… Annexure P-2.
3. Facts constitute offences under Sections 420, 406 BNS.
4. Prayer: a) Order SHO to register FIR;
b) Monitor investigation;
c) Pass further orders.

Filed by
[Advocate details]

Enforcement Timelines & Future Litigation Trends

1. July 2024 – BNSS came into force; Section 173 immediately applicable.

2. July 2025 & beyond – SC’s Anurag Bhatnagar ruling serves as binding precedent for magistrates nationwide.

3. Tech integration – State DGPs mandated to roll out e-FIR portals; expect writs on delayed portal deployment.

4. Preliminary Enquiry Challenges – Defence counsel likely to attack FIRs citing non-compliance with 14-day PE window. Courts will evolve PE jurisprudence.

Compliance Checklist for Police Officers

Conclusion

The twin forces of Supreme Court jurisprudence and the BNSS statutory overhaul have together created a clearer, more technology-friendly and citizen-centric pathway for FIR registration in India. Complainants must, however, respect the hierarchy: approach the police twice (SHO, then SP) before invoking judicial machinery under Section 156(3). Conversely, police officers are now bound by stricter timelines, digital transparency mandates, and enhanced victim-sensitive protocols.

By understanding these layered procedures and citing the July 2025 Supreme Court ruling alongside Section 173 BNSS, litigants, journalists and legal professionals can navigate FIR registration with clarity and confidence.

Key Takeaways

• Police First: Always attempt SHO and SP before filing under Section 156(3).

• BNSS Section 173: Embraces e-FIR, Zero-FIR, preliminary enquiry.

• Magistrate Power: Still intact, but ordinarily secondary.

• Digital Evidence: Ensure email receipts, online acknowledgments; they are admissible.

• Victim-Friendly: Women, children and disabled complainants enjoy enhanced safeguards.

Following these guidelines will ensure your FIR journey is legally sound, efficient and fully compliant with India’s updated criminal justice framework.

Frequently Asked Questions

References

1. ANURAG BHATNAGAR & ANR. …PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.  Available at : https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2024/43744/43744_2024_12_1501_62665_Judgement_25-Jul-2025.pdf

2. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Available at : https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/20099

3. Om Prakash Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and another Available at: https://mpsja.mphc.gov.in/Joti/pdf/LU/Guidelines%20for%20Magistrates%20156.pdf

4. BNSS Section 173 – Information in cognizable cases Available at :  https://www.latestlaws.com/bare-acts/central-acts-rules/bnss-section-173-information-in-cognizable-cases/

The post Section 173 BNSS / Section 154 CrPC: FIR Registration Rules & 173(4) BNSS Explained appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.