Sections 218–224 CrPC vs Sections 241–247 BNSS — Joinder of Charges

In India, Sections 241 to 247 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced Sections 218 to 224 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) from 1 July 2024. The rule of a separate charge and trial for each offence is unchanged, but up to five offences of the same kind within a year may now be tried together, instead of three.

These seven sections form Part B, "Joinder of charges", of the chapter on the charge (Chapter XVII of the CrPC, Chapter XVIII of the BNSS). Section 241 states the general rule; Sections 242 to 244 and 246 are the exceptions it names; Sections 245 and 247 deal with conviction for an uncharged minor offence and with withdrawing remaining charges after a conviction.

At a glance

These are procedural sections; neither First Schedule classifies them.

What changed

Substantive change

• Modified — Section 219 → Section 242. Sub-section (1): "any number of them not exceeding three" → "any number of them not exceeding five". Heading: "Three offences of same kind within year may be charged together" → "Offences of same kind within year may be charged together".

Drafting and cross-reference changes

• Section 218 → 241 — Minor edit. Sub-section (2) now saves "sections 242, 243, 244 and 246" (was "sections 219, 220, 221 and 223"). The proviso (joint trial on the accused's written application) and the illustration (theft and grievous hurt on different occasions) are unchanged.
• Section 219 → 242 — Minor edit (in addition to the change above). Sub-section (2): "the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)" → "the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023". The deeming proviso that treated theft under Section 379 IPC as the same kind as Section 380 IPC now reads "sub-section (2) of section 303" and "section 305" of the BNS; the comma after "Provided that" is dropped.
• Section 220 → 243 — Minor edit. Sub-section (2): "sub-section (2) of section 212" → "sub-section (2) of section 235"; "sub-section (1) of section 219" → "sub-section (1) of section 242". Sub-section (5): "section 71 of the Indian Penal Code" → "section 9 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023" (both headed "Limit of punishment of offence made up of several offences"). Illustrations: every IPC section is re-mapped to the BNS; Illustration (b) — house-breaking by day "with intent to commit adultery" and adultery, IPC 454 and 497 — becomes house-breaking by day "with intent to commit rape" and rape, BNS 64 and 331(3); Illustration (c) — enticing a married woman and adultery, IPC 498 and 497 — is omitted, so the CrPC's Illustrations (a) to (m) become (a) to (l).
• Section 221 → 244 — Minor edit. Text and Illustrations (a) to (c) repeat the CrPC, except that both the Gazette and the official BNSS text print "someone of the said offences" where Section 221(1) CrPC reads "some one of the said offences".
• Section 222 → 245 — Minor edit. Sub-sections (1) to (4) unchanged. Illustration (a): IPC 407 and 406 → BNS 316(3) and 316(2); Illustration (b): IPC 325 and 335 → BNS 117(2) and 122(2).
• Section 223 → 246 — Minor edit. Clause (c): "within the meaning of section 219" → "section 242"; clause (f): IPC "sections 411 and 414" → BNS "sub-sections (2) and (5) of section 317" (the words "or either of those sections" are retained); clause (g): "Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code" → "Chapter X of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023" (coin, currency-notes, bank-notes and Government stamps). The proviso repeats the CrPC as amended in 2006.
• Section 224 → 247 — Identical. Heading and text repeat the CrPC word for word.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract — Section 242(1) BNSS:

(1) When a person is accused of more offences than one of the same kind committed within the space of twelve months from the first to the last of such offences, whether in respect of the same person or not, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, any number of them not exceeding five.

Extract — Section 219(1) CrPC (old), closing words:

… he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, any number of them not exceeding three.

Extract — Section 241(1) BNSS (unchanged from Section 218(1) CrPC):

(1) For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a separate charge, and every such charge shall be tried separately:

How it works — the rule and its exceptions

1. The rule (Section 241). Every distinct offence gets a separate charge and a separate trial. The Act's illustration: A, accused of theft on one occasion and grievous hurt on another, "must be separately charged and separately tried". The proviso lets the Magistrate try all or any of the charges together if the accused applies in writing and is "not likely to be prejudiced thereby".

2. Same-kind offences within a year (Section 242). One accused; offences "of the same kind" — punishable with the same amount of punishment under the same section of the BNS or a special or local law; committed within twelve months "from the first to the last"; whether against the same person or not; up to five in one trial. Theft under Section 303(2) BNS and theft in a dwelling house etc. under Section 305 BNS are deemed the same kind, as is an attempt to commit an offence where the attempt is an offence.

3. Same transaction and related cases (Section 243). One accused may be tried at one trial for:

• every offence committed "in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction" (sub-section (1)) — Illustration (a): rescuing a person from lawful custody and grievously hurting the constable, BNS 121(2) and 263;
• criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation charged under Section 235(2) or 242(1), with falsification of accounts to facilitate or conceal it (sub-section (2));
• one set of acts falling within two or more definitions (sub-section (3)) — Illustration (h): striking with a cane, BNS 115(2) and 131;
• several acts that together form a different offence, and the offences formed by any of them (sub-section (4)) — Illustration (l): robbery with hurt, BNS 115(2) and 309(2) and (4). Sub-section (5) keeps Section 9 BNS, which limits punishment for an offence made up of several offences.

4. Doubt about the offence (Section 244). Where a single act or series of acts makes it doubtful which of several offences the provable facts will constitute, the accused may be charged with all or any of them, or in the alternative; if charged with one and another is proved, he may be convicted of the one proved (sub-section (2)). Illustration (c): contradictory statements on oath before the Magistrate and the Sessions Court may be charged in the alternative as intentionally giving false evidence.

5. Minor offence included (Section 245). Conviction for a minor offence where only some particulars are proved (sub-section (1)) or facts reduce it (sub-section (2)); conviction for an attempt not separately charged (sub-section (3)); but not where the conditions for initiating proceedings for the minor offence are unmet (sub-section (4)). Illustration (b): a person charged with grievous hurt under Section 117(2) BNS who proves grave and sudden provocation may be convicted under Section 122(2).

6. Joint accused (Section 246). Several persons may be charged and tried together in the seven situations in clauses (a) to (g) — same offence in the same transaction; principal offenders with abettors or attempters; same-kind offences committed jointly within twelve months; different offences in the same transaction; theft, extortion, cheating or criminal misappropriation with receivers of the property; offences under Section 317(2) and (5) BNS; and counterfeit-coin offences under Chapter X of the BNS. Outside them, the proviso permits a joint trial if the accused apply in writing and the court is satisfied they would not be prejudicially affected and it is expedient.

7. Withdrawal after conviction (Section 247). Once the accused is convicted on one or more heads of a multi-head charge, the complainant or prosecuting officer may, with the Court's consent, withdraw the rest, or the Court may stay them; the withdrawal "shall have the effect of an acquittal" on those charges unless the conviction is set aside.

What this means in practice

For the prosecution. In a trial under the BNSS, a charge-sheet alleging, for example, six thefts of the same kind within twelve months can carry five in one trial under Section 242(1); the sixth needs a separate trial unless another exception, such as the same transaction under Section 243(1), applies. Where many victims are alleged, Khimji Bhai Jadeja (2026) indicates that the "same transaction" inquiry is made by the Magistrate on the investigation material.

For the accused. The joinder exceptions are enabling ("may"), not mandatory. An accused who wants his distinct charges tried together may apply in writing under the proviso to Section 241(1); persons outside the Section 246 categories may apply jointly under its proviso. An objection to misjoinder is judged, on the Supreme Court's reasoning in Nasib Singh (2021), by prejudice and failure of justice, and should be raised at the start of the trial.

For the court. The joint-trial decision is made at the threshold of trial. In Lakshmanan (2025), a High Court direction for a joint trial made while deciding bail was set aside because it pre-empted the trial court's discretion and recorded no finding on the statutory conditions.

For advocates on conviction for an uncharged offence. Section 245 does not define "minor offence". Multtani (2001) requires cognate offences sharing the main ingredients; a lower sentence alone is not enough. In that case the High Court had convicted under Section 304-B IPC, which carries the presumption in Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, without the accused having had an opportunity to rebut it; the Supreme Court remanded the case so that the opportunity could be given.

Judgments that still matter

The operative words of Sections 241, 243, 244, 245 and 246 BNSS repeat Sections 218, 220, 221, 222 and 223 CrPC; on a reading of the text, judgments construing those words remain relevant. Two of the judgments below were decided after 1 July 2024 and refer to Section 242 BNSS.

Shamnshaeb M. Multtani v. State of Karnataka, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 514 (2001 INSC 43) — 24 January 2001. Bench of K. T. Thomas, R. P. Sethi and B. N. Agrawal JJ.; judgment by Thomas J. The High Court had convicted the husband under Section 304-B IPC though he was charged with murder under Section 302. Construing "minor offence" in Section 222 CrPC, the Court held that the test "is not merely that the prescribed punishment is less than the major offence"; only cognate offences "wherein the main ingredients are common" qualify, and Section 304-B is not a minor offence to Section 302 (report p. 521). Because the accused had not been given an opportunity to rebut the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence and remanded the case to the trial court to proceed against him from the stage of defence evidence. The appeal was allowed.

Nasib Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., [2021] 13 S.C.R. 566 (2021 INSC 642) — 8 October 2021. Bench of D. Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and B. V. Nagarathna JJ.; judgment by Chandrachud J. The High Court had ordered a retrial and a joint trial of two Sessions cases (a gang-rape FIR and an abetment-of-suicide FIR). Setting that order aside, the Court formulated the principles on joint and separate trials (para 38): Section 218 is the rule and Sections 219–221 and 223 the exceptions; the trial court applies a two-pronged test of prejudice to the defence and judicial delay; joinder is determined "at the beginning of the trial"; because the exceptions use "may", a separate trial is usually not contrary to law unless shown to cause a miscarriage of justice; and a conviction or acquittal cannot be set aside merely because a joint or separate trial was possible. The appeals were restored to the High Court for decision on merits (para 49).

Lakshmanan v. State through the Deputy Superintendent of Police & Ors., 2025 INSC 1483 — 19 December 2025. Bench of B. V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan JJ.; judgment by Mahadevan J. The Court described Section 242 BNSS as "in pari materia with Section 219 Cr.P.C." (para 13.2), quoted the joint-trial principles from its earlier judgment in Mamman Khan v. State of Haryana (para 13.3), and held that two cases from separate FIRs, registered in different years on distinct occurrences, were neither of the "same kind" nor the same transaction (para 13.4). A joint-trial direction issued at the bail stage "pre-empted and curtailed the statutory discretion vested in the trial Court" (para 13.6). The appeals were allowed, the High Court's judgment set aside and the bail cancelled (para 14).

The State (NCT) of Delhi v. Khimji Bhai Jadeja, [2026] 1 S.C.R. 167 (2026 INSC 25) — 6 January 2026. Bench of Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe JJ.; judgment by Sanjay Kumar J. On a reference about consolidating complaints by 1,852 alleged victims of one cheating scheme, the Court noted that three offences under Section 219 CrPC are now five under Section 242 BNSS (para 19), restated the "same transaction" tests — unity of purpose and design, proximity of time and place, continuity of action, "not to be applied cumulatively" (para 20) — and held that, a conspiracy being alleged, one FIR with the other complaints treated as statements was correct; whether the acts form one transaction is left to the Magistrate (paras 21–22). The High Court's answers on two questions were set aside (para 23).

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that any trial or inquiry pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is to be "continued, held or made" under the CrPC "as if this Sanhita had not come into force". On a reading of that text, joinder in a trial pending on that date is governed by Sections 218 to 224 CrPC, including the three-offence limit in Section 219; the five-offence limit applies to trials under the BNSS. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What are the BNSS equivalents of Sections 218 to 224 CrPC?

Sections 241 to 247 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replace Sections 218 to 224 CrPC in the same order: 218 is now 241 (separate charges), 219 is 242 (same-kind offences within a year), 220 is 243 (same transaction), 221 is 244 (doubtful offence), 222 is 245 (minor offence), 223 is 246 (joint accused) and 224 is 247 (withdrawal of remaining charges). They apply from 1 July 2024.

How many offences of the same kind can be tried together under the BNSS?

Under Section 242(1) BNSS, a person accused of offences of the same kind committed within twelve months from the first to the last may be charged with and tried at one trial for 'any number of them not exceeding five'. Section 219(1) CrPC allowed three. Offences are of the same kind when punishable with the same amount of punishment under the same section of the BNS or of a special or local law (Section 242(2)).

Is a joint trial compulsory when offences form the same transaction?

No. Section 243(1) BNSS says the accused 'may be charged with, and tried at one trial for' every such offence. In Nasib Singh v. State of Punjab ([2021] 13 S.C.R. 566) the Supreme Court held that because the exceptions use 'may', a separate trial is usually not contrary to law unless it is shown to cause a miscarriage of justice, and that the question is decided at the beginning of the trial (para 38).

What does 'same transaction' mean for joinder of charges?

Neither the CrPC nor the BNSS defines it. In State (NCT) of Delhi v. Khimji Bhai Jadeja ([2026] 1 S.C.R. 167) the Supreme Court restated three tests, not to be applied cumulatively: unity of purpose and design, proximity of time and place, and continuity of action (para 20). Whether a series of acts meets them is for the Magistrate on the charge-sheet material (para 22).

Can a court convict for an offence that was not charged?

Yes, in two situations. Under Section 244(2) BNSS, where it was doubtful which offence the facts would constitute, the accused may be convicted of a different offence for which he might have been charged. Under Section 245 BNSS, he may be convicted of a minor offence included in the offence charged, or of an attempt. Section 245(4) bars such a conviction where the conditions for initiating proceedings for the minor offence are not satisfied.

What is a minor offence under Section 245 BNSS?

The section does not define it. Construing Section 222 CrPC, whose sub-sections Section 245 repeats, the Supreme Court in Shamnshaeb M. Multtani v. State of Karnataka ([2001] 1 S.C.R. 514) held that a lower punishment is not enough: only a cognate offence sharing the main ingredients of the offence charged is a minor offence. It held that dowry death under Section 304-B IPC is not a minor offence to murder under Section 302 IPC.

Can several accused be tried together for different offences?

Yes, if a clause of Section 246 BNSS applies, for example persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction (clause (d)). The proviso also allows the Magistrate or Court of Session to try persons outside those categories together if they apply in writing and the court is satisfied they would not be prejudicially affected and it is expedient to do so.

Does the five-offence rule apply to a trial pending on 1 July 2024?

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that a trial pending immediately before 1 July 2024 continues under the Code of Criminal Procedure as if the BNSS had not come into force. On a reading of that text, joinder in such a trial is governed by Section 219 CrPC, which allows three offences of the same kind within a year.

Related

• Sections 227 and 239 CrPC vs Sections 250 and 262 BNSS — Discharge
• Section 319 CrPC vs Section 358 BNSS — Summoning additional accused
• Sections 378–382 IPC vs BNS — Theft
• Section 406 IPC vs Section 316 BNS — Criminal breach of trust
• Section 304B IPC vs BNS — Dowry death
• CrPC to BNSS master comparison table

Sources

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette of India text): Sections 241 to 247 with illustrations, 531(2)(a); headings of Sections 234 to 247.
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (India Code original text, with footnotes): Sections 218 to 224 with illustrations.
• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Indian Penal Code, 1860 (official texts): headings of BNS 9, 64, 117, 122, 303, 305, 316, 317, 331 and Chapter X; IPC 71, 379, 380.
• Supreme Court judgments read in full text: Shamnshaeb M. Multtani v. State of Karnataka (2001_1_514_526_EN.md); Nasib Singh v. State of Punjab (2021_13_566_610_EN.md); Lakshmanan v. State (Diary_22351-2025_Judgment.md); State (NCT) of Delhi v. Khimji Bhai Jadeja (2026_1_167_182_EN.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.