FIR (First Information Report)
Section 173 BNSS 2023Definition: Written record of information relating to a cognizable offence, registered by the police under Section 173 BNSS (formerly Section 154 CrPC). Triggers police investigation and forms the foundation of every criminal prosecution.
An FIR is the formal written record made by a police officer (typically the Station House Officer or Duty Officer) of information received about the commission of a cognizable offence. Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS), which replaced Section 154 of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 with effect from 1 July 2024, makes FIR registration mandatory for cognizable offences. Following the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1, the police cannot refuse FIR registration except in seven enumerated categories where preliminary inquiry is permissible.
Anticipatory Bail
Section 482 BNSS 2023Definition: Pre-arrest order under Section 482 BNSS (formerly Section 438 CrPC) directing that, in the event of arrest of the applicant on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he or she shall be released on bail.
Anticipatory bail is a protective order granted by the High Court or Court of Session under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, which replaced Section 438 of the erstwhile CrPC. It is sought when a person has reason to believe that he or she may be arrested on accusation of a non-bailable offence. The Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1, held that anticipatory bail is not automatically time-limited and may extend through investigation, trial, or beyond.
Regular Bail
Sections 480, 483 BNSS 2023Definition: Bail granted to an accused person already in custody under Section 480 (bailable offences) or Section 483 (non-bailable offences) BNSS. Distinct from anticipatory bail, which is granted before arrest.
Regular bail is granted post-arrest. For bailable offences (Section 480 BNSS), bail is a matter of right. For non-bailable offences (Section 483 BNSS), bail is discretionary and is decided based on factors including nature and gravity of the offence, prima facie evidence, antecedents of the accused, possibility of fleeing, and risk of witness tampering. The Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, laid down comprehensive guidelines for grant of bail to accused persons in different offence categories.
Default Bail (Statutory Bail)
Section 187(3) BNSS 2023Definition: Statutory right to bail under Section 187(3) BNSS when the prosecution fails to file the charge-sheet within 60 or 90 days of the accused's first remand to custody.
Default bail, also known as statutory bail or compulsive bail, is the indefeasible right of an accused person to be released on bail when the investigation has not been completed within the statutory period — 60 days for offences punishable up to 10 years and 90 days for offences punishable beyond 10 years and capital offences. The right arises under Section 187(3) BNSS (formerly Section 167(2) CrPC). The accused must apply before the charge-sheet is filed; once filed, the right is extinguished. The Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil affirmed the absolute nature of this right.
Quashing of FIR
Section 528 BNSS 2023Definition: High Court order under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC) inherent powers, terminating an FIR or criminal proceeding that discloses no offence, is malicious, time-barred, or has been compounded between parties.
Quashing is the High Court's exercise of inherent jurisdiction to terminate criminal proceedings that should not continue. The Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, laid down seven categories where quashing is appropriate, including where the allegations do not disclose a cognizable offence, are absurd or improbable, or are manifestly attended with mala fides. Quashing applications are filed before the High Court of the state where the FIR is registered.
Cognizable Offence
Schedule 1, BNSS 2023Definition: Offence in which a police officer may arrest without warrant and may register an FIR and investigate without magistrate's sanction. Listed in the First Schedule to the BNSS.
Cognizable offences include serious crimes such as murder, rape, robbery, dacoity, theft above specified value, kidnapping, dowry death, and most BNS offences punishable with imprisonment of three years or more. The classification — cognizable vs non-cognizable — appears in Schedule 1 of the BNSS and determines whether the police can proceed without magistrate involvement. For non-cognizable offences, an NCR (Non-Cognizable Report) is recorded but investigation requires Magistrate's permission under Section 174 BNSS.
Charge-sheet (Final Report)
Section 193 BNSS 2023Definition: Police report under Section 193 BNSS (formerly Section 173 CrPC) filed at the conclusion of investigation, stating the facts found, the persons accused, and the sections under which prosecution is recommended.
The charge-sheet is the police's formal recommendation to the Magistrate to take cognizance and proceed to trial. It contains: a narration of the facts disclosed by investigation; statements of witnesses recorded under Section 180 BNSS (formerly 161 CrPC); list of documents, exhibits, and material objects seized; the sections of law alleged to have been violated; and the names and details of accused persons. Once filed, the Magistrate considers the charge-sheet and either takes cognizance and proceeds to trial or declines to do so.
Compoundable Offence
Section 359 BNSS 2023Definition: Offence which the complainant and accused can settle (compound) under Section 359 BNSS (formerly Section 320 CrPC), terminating prosecution. Categorised as compoundable with or without court permission.
Compoundable offences are those that the legislature deems suitable for private settlement between victim and accused. Section 359 BNSS lists offences in two categories: those compoundable without court permission (typically minor disputes — simple hurt, defamation, criminal trespass) and those compoundable with court permission (more serious — voluntarily causing hurt with dangerous weapons, criminal breach of trust, theft below specified value). Once compounded, the prosecution stands terminated and the accused is acquitted. Murder, rape, dowry death, and other grave offences are non-compoundable.
Summons Case / Warrant Case
Section 261 BNSS 2023Definition: Procedural classification under Section 261 BNSS — summons cases (offences punishable up to 2 years) follow simpler procedure; warrant cases (offences punishable beyond 2 years) follow elaborate trial under Sections 263-274 BNSS.
The classification determines trial procedure. Summons cases are tried under simpler procedure: substance of accusation is stated, evidence is taken, defence heard, judgment delivered. Warrant cases are tried more elaborately: charges are framed, prosecution examines and is cross-examined, accused examined under Section 351 BNSS, defence evidence taken, arguments heard, judgment delivered. Sessions trial follows yet more elaborate procedure under Sections 277-296 BNSS.
Section 138 NI Act (Cheque Bounce)
Section 138 NI Act 1881Definition: Penal provision in the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 making dishonour of cheque drawn for legally enforceable debt or liability a punishable offence, with maximum imprisonment of 2 years or fine up to twice the cheque amount.
Section 138 NI Act creates the criminal-quasi-civil cheque-bounce offence. Elements: (i) cheque drawn on an account; (ii) for legally enforceable debt or liability; (iii) presented within validity (typically 3 months); (iv) dishonoured for insufficient funds, stop-payment, or other specified reasons; (v) demand notice within 30 days of dishonour; (vi) non-payment within 15 days of receipt of notice; (vii) complaint within 30 days of cause of action. Section 143 provides for summary trial, accelerating disposal.
Arnesh Kumar Guidelines
(2014) 8 SCC 273; Section 35 BNSSDefinition: Supreme Court directions in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, restraining automatic arrest in offences punishable up to 7 years (notably Section 498A IPC / 85 BNS). Section 35(3) BNSS notice procedure is mandatory.
In Arnesh Kumar, the Supreme Court held that police must apply mind before arresting in any offence punishable up to 7 years. The guidelines: (i) police shall not automatically arrest under Section 498A or any offence punishable up to 7 years; (ii) checklist under Section 41(1)(b) CrPC (now Section 35 BNSS) must be filled in writing, including whether arrest is necessary for investigation, prevention of further offence, securing evidence, or preventing tampering; (iii) the magistrate must scrutinise the checklist before authorising further detention. Failure to follow the guidelines exposes police to departmental action and contempt.
Lalita Kumari Mandate
(2014) 2 SCC 1Definition: Supreme Court Constitution Bench ruling in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1, holding that FIR registration is mandatory for cognizable offences. Preliminary inquiry permitted only in seven specified categories.
The five-judge Bench held that Section 154 CrPC (now Section 173 BNSS) is mandatory for cognizable offences. Police cannot conduct preliminary inquiry before FIR registration except in seven categories: (i) matrimonial/family disputes; (ii) commercial offences; (iii) medical negligence; (iv) corruption cases; (v) cases with extraordinary delay (over three months) in reporting; (vi) cases involving public officials acting in good faith; (vii) cases where the legal nature of the offence is unclear. Even in these categories, preliminary inquiry must be completed within 7 days (extendable to 15 days), and FIR must be registered if a cognizable offence is disclosed.
PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002)
Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002Definition: Statute targeting money laundering. Section 3 defines the offence; Section 4 prescribes punishment up to 7 years imprisonment plus fine. Investigation and prosecution by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
PMLA criminalises the projection of proceeds of crime as untainted property. Section 3 defines money laundering; Section 4 prescribes punishment (3-7 years imprisonment, extendable to 10 years for narcotics-related cases). Section 8 governs property attachment. Section 19 governs arrest powers. Section 24 reverses the burden of proof in specified circumstances. Section 45 imposes twin conditions for bail (reasonable grounds for believing accused not guilty + not likely to commit offence on bail), making bail in PMLA cases challenging. The Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (2022) upheld most provisions but constrained ED's investigative powers.
NDPS Act Section 37 (Twin Conditions for Bail)
Section 37 NDPS Act 1985Definition: Provision in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 imposing twin conditions for bail in commercial-quantity offences: reasonable grounds for believing not guilty + not likely to commit offence on bail.
Section 37 NDPS imposes the most stringent bail conditions in Indian criminal law. For commercial-quantity offences (specified in the Schedule), bail is permissible only if (i) the public prosecutor has opportunity to oppose; and (ii) where opposed, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused not guilty AND not likely to commit any offence on bail. The Supreme Court in Mohammed Yousuf Rather v. State of J&K (2023) reiterated that Section 37 is to be strictly applied. Result: NDPS commercial-quantity bails are difficult and often pursued through quashing or trial-stage acquittal rather than bail.
IT Act 2000 — Sections 66 and 66A
Information Technology Act 2000Definition: Section 66 IT Act 2000 criminalises computer-related offences (hacking, identity theft, cyberstalking). Section 66A was struck down in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) for unconstitutional vagueness.
The Information Technology Act 2000 (as amended by the IT Amendment Act 2008) governs cybercrime in India. Section 66 covers offences such as hacking with intent to damage (Section 66B — receiving stolen computer resources, Section 66C — identity theft, Section 66D — cheating by impersonation, Section 66E — privacy violation, Section 66F — cyber terrorism). The Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1, struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional for vagueness and overbreadth. Sections 67-67B address obscenity and child pornography online.