Offence Committed Before 1 July 2024: Does the IPC/CrPC/Evidence Act or the BNS/BNSS/BSA Apply?

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) came into force on 1 July 2024, repealing the IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act. Section 531 BNSS, section 358 BNS and section 170 BSA each contain a savings clause, and Article 20(1) of the Constitution independently bars conviction except for violation of a law in force when the act was done and caps the penalty at what that law allowed — together, these texts (read in India) answer most, but not all, of the "which law applies" questions that follow.

The situation

A person is facing, or has already faced, a criminal proceeding that straddles 1 July 2024 in some way — the act happened before that date, but the FIR, trial, appeal or evidentiary step falls on one side or the other of the commencement line. The IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act are formally repealed. What actually happens to that person's case depends on exactly what each savings clause says, not on a general assumption that "old cases keep the old law."

Old law vs new law at a glance

What the law requires now, step by step

Step 1 — Identify which code the situation falls under: substantive, procedural, or evidentiary

The three savings clauses are not identical, and the difference matters:

• BNS section 358 governs the IPC → BNS transition (what is an offence, what punishment applies).
• BNSS section 531 governs the CrPC → BNSS transition (how the case is investigated, tried, appealed).
• BSA section 170 governs the Evidence Act → BSA transition (what evidence is admissible and how it is proved).

A single case can engage all three at different points, and each clause has to be checked on its own text.

Step 2 — Check whether the proceeding was "pending" immediately before commencement

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS states:

"there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such... shall be disposed of, continued, held or made... in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973... as if this Sanhita had not come into force"

Section 170(2) BSA uses near-identical language, adding "proceeding" to the list of what can be pending:

"there is any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal pending, then, such... shall be dealt with under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872... as if this Adhiniyam had not come into force"

Both clauses turn on one fact: was the appeal, application, trial, inquiry, investigation or proceeding pending on the day immediately before 1 July 2024? If yes, the old CrPC (for procedure) or old Evidence Act (for evidence) continues to apply to that matter, in full, as if the new code had never commenced. If no — because the matter had not yet begun as of that date — the text of section 531(2)(a) and section 170(2) does not extend the saving to it.

Step 3 — For the substantive offence and punishment, apply Article 20(1) regardless of the procedural posture

Article 20(1) of the Constitution states:

"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."

This operates independently of whether the FIR, trial or appeal is "pending" as of commencement. It fixes two things by reference to the date the act was done, not the date any procedural step occurred: (a) whether the act was an offence at all, and under which provision, and (b) the outer limit of the punishment that can be imposed. Section 358(2)(c) BNS states the same point from the repeal side: the repeal of the IPC does not affect "any penalty, or punishment incurred in respect of any offences committed against the Code so repealed."

Step 4 — For a fresh proceeding started after 1 July 2024 concerning an old offence, read section 358(2)(e) BNS carefully

Section 358(2)(e) BNS states that a proceeding or remedy in respect of a penalty or punishment incurred under the IPC:

"any such proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty may be imposed as if that Code had not been repealed"

The word "instituted" is doing real work here — it covers a proceeding that begins for the first time after the IPC's repeal, not only one that was already running. This is the textual basis for prosecuting, after 1 July 2024, an act that was an offence under the IPC when it occurred.

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS and section 170(2) BSA, by contrast, do not use "instituted" — as read, they save only what was "pending" immediately before commencement. This guide does not go further than that: on the text alone, there is no equivalent express statement authorising a freshly begun investigation, trial-stage evidentiary process, or appeal after 1 July 2024 to proceed under the CrPC or the Evidence Act. BNS explicitly bridges the "instituted after repeal" gap for the offence and punishment; BNSS and BSA, on their words, do not carry the same bridge for procedure and evidence.

Step 5 — For procedure in a matter that was not pending, read section 4 BNSS

The savings clause is not the only relevant text. Section 4 BNSS, the Sanhita's own application clause, states:

"(1) All offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the provisions hereinafter contained. (2) All offences under any other law shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the same provisions..."

Read with section 358(2)(e) BNS, which keeps a pre-commencement IPC offence prosecutable "as if that Code had not been repealed", this points to BNSS procedure for an investigation or trial that begins after 1 July 2024 about an act committed before it: the offence and punishment come from the IPC, the procedure from the BNSS. Treat this as a reading of the two texts together rather than an express rule. Section 4 does not say in terms that an IPC offence saved by section 358 is an "offence under any other law". For evidence, the BSA's application clause, section 1(2), states that the Adhiniyam "applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial"; read with section 170(2), which saves only what was pending, this points to the BSA for a proceeding begun after 1 July 2024 — again a reading, not an express rule.

What changed — and what did not

• Parallel, not identical: Section 358(2)(a)-(e) BNS preserves the previous operation of the IPC, accrued rights and liabilities, penalties and punishments, and related investigations, proceedings and remedies, closely tracking General Clauses Act 1897 s.6(b)-(e), which states the repeal of an enactment does not "affect the previous operation" of the repealed law, "affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred," or "affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed." Section 531(2) BNSS and section 170(2) BSA are narrower: they save pending matters (and, for BNSS, notifications, orders, sanctions and consents) but do not list accrued rights or penalties. General Clauses Act s.6 applies "unless a different intention appears", and its closing words also state that "any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced ... as if the repealing Act or Regulation had not been passed"; how far that carries over to the CrPC and Evidence Act repeals, given the narrower wording of sections 531 and 170, is not stated in any of the texts read.
• New provision: Section 358(4) BNS expressly states that the specific savings listed in section 358(2) do not prejudice "the general application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897... with regard to the effect of the repeal" — BNSS section 531 and BSA section 170 contain no equivalent cross-reference to the General Clauses Act in the text read.
• Modified: BNSS section 531(2)(b)-(c) adds detail not present as such in BNS or BSA — under clause (b), notifications, proclamations, powers conferred, forms, local jurisdictions, sentences, orders, rules and appointments (other than Special Magistrates) made under the CrPC and in force immediately before commencement are deemed made under the corresponding BNSS provision; under clause (c), a sanction or consent given under the CrPC on which no proceeding was commenced is deemed given under the corresponding BNSS provision, and "proceedings may be commenced under this Sanhita" on it.
• Partly answered by other text: sections 531 and 170 do not say which code governs a proceeding begun only after 1 July 2024 for pre-commencement conduct. For procedure, section 4(2) BNSS read with section 358(2)(e) BNS points to the BNSS (Step 5). For evidence, section 1(2) BSA, which states the Adhiniyam "applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court", read with section 170(2) BSA saving only what was pending, points to the BSA. Both are readings of the texts together, not express rules.

Which law applies to your case

This is the anchor for the whole series: for the offence and its punishment, Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars conviction except for violation of a law in force when the act was committed and caps the penalty at what that law allowed, and section 358(2)(c)-(e) BNS keeps IPC penalties imposable "as if that Code had not been repealed" — read together, these point to the law in force when the act was committed. For an appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation already pending immediately before 1 July 2024, the old CrPC continues to govern it under section 531(2)(a) BNSS, and the old Evidence Act continues to govern evidence in a pending trial under section 170(2) BSA. Where nothing was pending on that date, for example an FIR registered after 1 July 2024 for an act committed earlier, section 4(2) BNSS read with section 358(2)(e) BNS points to IPC for the offence and BNSS for procedure, and section 1(2) BSA read with section 170(2) BSA points to the BSA for evidence. Those are readings of the texts together, not express rules (see Step 5).

Practical checklist

For the person affected:

• Note the exact date the alleged act occurred — this fixes the offence definition and punishment ceiling under Article 20(1), regardless of when the FIR was filed.
• Note whether any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation in your matter was already pending on 30 June 2024 — this determines whether section 531(2)(a) BNSS or section 170(2) BSA saves it for disposal under the old code.
• Do not assume a post-1 July 2024 FIR for an older act displaces the IPC's offence definition — section 358(2) BNS says otherwise.

For the advocate:

• Plead the date of the act, not the date of the FIR or chargesheet, when raising an Article 20(1) point on offence definition or sentence ceiling.
• Where a proceeding was not pending as of 1 July 2024, do not rely on section 531(2)(a) BNSS or section 170(2) BSA to argue that the old CrPC or Evidence Act governs it — the text does not extend that saving to a freshly instituted matter.
• Cross-check section 358(2)(e) BNS specifically where the question concerns institution of a fresh proceeding for an old IPC offence — it is the one savings clause in the three that expressly uses "instituted."

Frequently asked questions

I committed an act before 1 July 2024 but the FIR was registered after that date. Which law applies?

For the offence itself and the punishment, Article 20(1) of the Constitution states no person shall be convicted "except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the Act," nor subjected to a penalty greater than the law in force then allowed. Section 358(2)(e) BNS separately states that a proceeding or remedy "may be instituted, continued or enforced" for a penalty incurred under the IPC, and the penalty imposed, "as if that Code had not been repealed." Read together, these point to the IPC's offence definition and punishment. For the investigation and trial, section 4(2) BNSS, which applies BNSS procedure to offences under any other law, read with section 358(2)(e) BNS, points to BNSS procedure. Both conclusions are readings of the texts together, not express rules.

My trial was already underway on 1 July 2024. Does it continue under the CrPC or move to the BNSS?

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS states that any trial "pending" immediately before the BNSS came into force "shall be disposed of, continued, held or made" under the CrPC 1973 "as if this Sanhita had not come into force." A trial already running on 1 July 2024 continues under the CrPC.

Can I be convicted or sentenced under the BNS for an act that was only punishable under the IPC when I did it?

No, on the text of Article 20(1) of the Constitution: no person can be convicted except under a law in force at the time the act was done, and no penalty greater than what that law allowed can be imposed. Read with section 358(2)(e) BNS, which allows an IPC penalty to be imposed as if the IPC had not been repealed, this points to the IPC's offence definition and punishment range, not the BNS's, for an act done before 1 July 2024 — a reading of the two texts together.

The trial and conviction happened before 1 July 2024, and I am filing my appeal now. Which code governs the appeal?

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS saves only an appeal that was already "pending" immediately before the Sanhita came into force, continuing it under the CrPC. The section's text does not extend that saving to an appeal filed for the first time after 1 July 2024 against an earlier conviction — this specific situation is not squarely answered in the section read, and this guide does not go beyond what the text states.

Is evidence recorded under the Evidence Act still valid in my case?

Section 170(2) BSA states that if a trial, inquiry, investigation or proceeding was pending immediately before the BSA came into force, it "shall be dealt with" under the Indian Evidence Act 1872 "as if this Adhiniyam had not come into force." For a case whose trial was already pending on 1 July 2024, the Evidence Act's rules of evidence continue to apply to that proceeding.

The IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act are repealed. Does that mean they no longer matter for old cases?

No. Section 358(2) BNS states that the repeal of the IPC does not affect rights, liabilities, penalties or punishments incurred under it, and section 531(2) BNSS and section 170(2) BSA keep matters pending on 1 July 2024 under the CrPC and the Evidence Act, and General Clauses Act 1897 s.6 independently preserves the same categories "unless a different intention appears" in the repealing Act. The repealed codes remain the applicable law for what they were preserved for.

Related on Veritect

• CrPC to BNSS: Complete Section Mapping
• IPC to BNS: Complete Section Mapping
• Evidence Act to BSA: Complete Section Mapping
• Claiming Maintenance: Section 125 CrPC vs Section 144 BNSS
• "Section 144" Orders Under the New Law: CrPC 144 vs BNSS 163
• Getting a Seized Vehicle or Property Back: CrPC 451-459 vs BNSS 497-505
• Sections 349–358 IPC vs Sections 128–136 BNS — Assault and Criminal Force
• Sections 3–11 and 194 CrPC vs Sections 3–9 and 214 BNSS — Classes and Constitution of Criminal Courts
• Section 484 CrPC vs Section 531 BNSS — Repeal and Savings
• Section 1 Evidence Act vs Section 1 BSA — Short Title, Application and Commencement

Statutory sources

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 531 (Repeal and savings)
• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 358 (Repeal and savings)
• Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 170 (Repeal and savings)
• Constitution of India — Article 20, clause (1)
• General Clauses Act, 1897 — Section 6 (Effect of repeal)

This guide explains the statutory text of the BNS, BNSS and BSA as enacted. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.