Home Laws Case Laws Chapter 3: Power of Courts under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Chapter 3: Power of Courts under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Introduction

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is a comprehensive legislation designed to replace the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, which has governed criminal procedure in India for nearly fifty years[1]. The BNSS, which received Presidential assent on December 25, 2023, represents a significant modernization of India’s criminal justice system. Chapter 3 of the BNSS, comprising sections 21 to 29, delineates the foundational powers of criminal courts, establishing the jurisdictional framework within which these courts operate and the authority they exercise in the administration of criminal justice[2].

This chapter is crucial to understanding the institutional architecture of criminal courts in India, as it defines the classification of courts, their jurisdictional boundaries, and the powers vested in them for the effective delivery of justice. The chapter serves as a structural backbone for all criminal proceedings conducted in India under the new Sanhita.

Overview of Chapter 3

Chapter 3, titled “Power of Courts,” comprises nine sections (21 to 29) that establish the framework for criminal court jurisdiction and their powers. These sections define:

The classification of criminal courts
Territorial jurisdiction of courts
Pecuniary jurisdiction of courts
Powers and authority of various court levels
Special provisions for different types of proceedings

The chapter represents a shift toward greater clarity and more streamlined procedural mechanisms compared to the CrPC, 1973. It incorporates contemporary judicial practices and addresses ambiguities that existed in the previous code[3].

Classification of Criminal Courts

Section 21: Establishment of Criminal Courts

Section 21 of the BNSS establishes the hierarchy and types of criminal courts that exist within India’s judicial system. These courts are structured hierarchically to ensure efficient administration of justice at various levels:

Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court operates as the apex court for criminal matters, exercising appellate and revisional jurisdiction over cases decided by High Courts. It serves as the final arbiter in criminal cases of national importance and matters involving substantial questions of law.

High Courts
High Courts exercise supervisory, appellate, and revisional jurisdiction over courts within their territorial jurisdiction. They review judgments and orders passed by lower courts and can interfere in matters involving substantial questions of law or gross miscarriage of justice.

District Courts (Sessions Courts)
District courts, also known as Sessions Courts, have the largest criminal jurisdiction. They try the most serious offences and hear appeals from Magistrate courts. The district court is typically presided over by a Sessions Judge.

Magistrate Courts
Magistrate courts form the grassroots level of the criminal justice system. They are further classified into:

Metropolitan Magistrate Courts (in urban areas with metropolitan magistrates)
Judicial Magistrate Courts (First Class and Second Class)
Chief Judicial Magistrate Courts

Each level has progressively increased powers and jurisdiction over different categories of offences[3].

Territorial Jurisdiction

Section 22: Territorial Limits of Courts

Section 22 establishes that criminal courts exercise jurisdiction only within their defined territorial boundaries. The principle of territorial jurisdiction ensures:

Clear demarcation of areas of responsibility for each court
Prevention of conflicts between courts in different jurisdictions
Efficient administration of justice by assigning cases to appropriate courts

The territorial jurisdiction of courts is typically defined by:

State boundaries for High Courts
District boundaries for Sessions Courts
Sub-district or taluk boundaries for lower Magistrate courts

Violations of territorial jurisdiction can lead to quashing of proceedings or invalidity of orders. However, courts possess inherent powers to exercise jurisdiction in certain exceptional circumstances, particularly when the offence or parties involved have significant nexus with the territory[4].

Section 23: Jurisdiction Over Offences Committed Outside Territory

An important provision in this chapter addresses the situation where an offence is committed outside the territorial jurisdiction of a particular court. Section 23 establishes that:

A court can exercise jurisdiction over offences committed partially within its territory
Proceedings can be transferred to the appropriate court if the offence was committed outside any court’s jurisdiction
Courts possess the power to determine whether they have jurisdiction over a case

This provision is particularly significant in cases involving:

Conspiracy – committed in one place, executed in another
Continuous offences – spanning multiple jurisdictions
Criminal acts with effects – committed in one place but having consequences elsewhere

The section balances the need for operational efficiency with the requirement of proper jurisdictional authority[3].

Pecuniary Jurisdiction

Section 24: Pecuniary Jurisdiction of Magistrate Courts

Pecuniary jurisdiction refers to the monetary limit of punishments that a court is authorized to impose. Section 24 of the BNSS specifies the pecuniary jurisdiction of various Magistrate courts:

Chief Judicial Magistrate / Metropolitan Magistrate

Authority to impose fines up to specified limits
Broader pecuniary jurisdiction compared to other magistrate courts
Ability to handle cases involving larger financial penalties

First Class Judicial Magistrate

Limited pecuniary jurisdiction compared to Chief Magistrates
Defined monetary ceiling on fines and imprisonment terms

Second Class Judicial Magistrate

Most restricted pecuniary jurisdiction
Limited to cases with lower monetary values of punishment

The pecuniary jurisdiction determines which court can try a particular case based on the severity of punishment prescribed for the offence. This hierarchical structure ensures that:

Serious offences are tried by courts with greater experience and authority
Resources of higher courts are not unnecessarily consumed by minor cases
Standardized procedures are followed across courts of similar classification[2]

Powers of Criminal Courts

Section 25: General Powers of Courts

Section 25 vests criminal courts with the general powers necessary to conduct proceedings and ensure justice. These powers include:

Powers of Investigation and Evidence Collection
Courts possess the authority to:

Direct the investigation of offences
Require production of evidence
Summon witnesses and examine them
Compel production of documents and electronic communication devices

Powers of Adjudication
Courts are empowered to:

Hear evidence from both prosecution and defense
Examine the credibility of witnesses
Evaluate evidence and reach conclusions on facts
Determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented

Powers of Sentencing
Upon conviction, courts possess the authority to:

Impose imprisonment as prescribed by law
Impose fines
Award compensation to victims
Pronounce other forms of punishment as provided by substantive criminal law

Inherent Powers
Courts retain inherent powers under the law to:

Exercise discretion in matters of procedure
Prevent abuse of judicial process
Secure the ends of justice
Safeguard the rights of accused persons

These powers are exercised within the boundaries set by substantive criminal law and the BNSS itself[3].

Section 26: Powers of Sessions Courts

Sessions Courts possess significantly greater powers than Magistrate courts, reflecting their position in the judicial hierarchy:

Trial Jurisdiction

Authority to try all categories of offences
Ability to impose any sentence prescribed by law, including life imprisonment and death penalty

Appellate Powers

Hear appeals from decisions of Magistrate courts
Review and set aside erroneous orders or judgments

Revisional Powers

Exercise powers of revision over subordinate courts
Intervene in cases involving substantial questions of law or gross miscarriage of justice

Powers Over Witnesses and Evidence

Greater authority to control court proceedings
Power to impose penalties for contempt of court
Authority to compel attendance of witnesses from wider geographical areas[2]

Section 27: Powers of High Courts

High Courts exercise the most extensive powers within the criminal justice system at the state level:

Appellate Jurisdiction

Hear appeals from Sessions Courts in the most serious cases
Review death sentences and life imprisonment sentences as a matter of course

Revisional Jurisdiction

Exercise extensive powers of revision over all subordinate courts
Intervene in matters involving substantial questions of law
Prevent gross miscarriage of justice

Powers of Supervision

Supervisory jurisdiction over all courts within the state
Authority to issue directions to subordinate courts
Power to ensure adherence to constitutional principles and legal procedures

Constitutional Powers

Exercise of powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
Authority to issue writs for protection of fundamental rights
Power to ensure habeas corpus protection for illegally detained persons[4]

Special Provisions and Procedural Matters

Section 28: Constitution of Benches

Section 28 addresses the constitution of benches for hearing cases at various court levels:

Single Judge Benches: Magistrate courts and many Sessions Courts are constituted as single judge benches
Division Benches: High Courts typically function as division benches with two or more judges for hearing important cases
Constitution of Benches: Appropriate Chief Justices or Chief Judges possess authority to constitute benches based on case requirements and workload distribution

The flexibility in bench constitution ensures efficient case management and appropriate deployment of judicial resources[3].

Section 29: Miscellaneous Powers

Section 29 encompasses various miscellaneous powers of criminal courts, including:

Powers to Regulate Court Proceedings

Authority to make rules for regulating the conduct of cases
Power to prescribe procedures for recording evidence
Authority to establish protocols for examination of witnesses

Powers Related to Electronic Proceedings
In alignment with modern judicial practices, courts possess authority to:

Conduct trials, inquiries, and proceedings through electronic means
Accept electronic communication devices as evidence
Record proceedings electronically where permitted by law

Powers for Efficiency and Justice

Authority to adjourn proceedings
Power to issue commissions for examination of witnesses
Authority to conduct inquiries and inspections as necessary

Modern Amendments and Key Developments

Digital and Electronic Evidence

A significant development incorporated into Chapter 3’s framework is the provision for electronic proceedings. The BNSS recognizes the technological advances in justice delivery and permits:

Electronic trials and inquiries
Submission of electronic communication devices as evidence
Video recording of proceedings
Digital documentation and maintenance of case files

This modernization reflects India’s commitment to efficient justice delivery in the digital age[1].

Victim-Centric Approach

The BNSS, and by extension Chapter 3’s jurisdictional framework, emphasizes a more victim-centric approach compared to the CrPC. Courts now possess specific powers to:

Hear victims before withdrawal of prosecution (Section 360 BNSS)
Award compensation to victims
Ensure victim participation in criminal proceedings
Record victim statements with appropriate gravity[1]

Forensic Investigation Framework

Chapter 3’s framework enables criminal courts to oversee forensic investigations effectively. For offences punishable with seven years or more imprisonment, courts ensure:

Forensic experts visit crime scenes
Scientific evidence collection is properly documented
Digital forensic evidence is appropriately handled
Expert testimony is properly recorded[3]

Comparison with Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

Key Differences

The BNSS represents several significant departures from the CrPC, 1973 framework:

Aspect	CrPC, 1973	BNSS, 2023
Court Classification	Limited explicit hierarchy	Clear hierarchical structure
Territorial Jurisdiction	General provisions	Enhanced clarity and specific provisions
Electronic Proceedings	Not contemplated	Explicitly permitted
Victim Participation	Limited scope	Expanded victim rights
Digital Evidence	Limited provisions	Comprehensive digital evidence framework
Investigation Timeline	Flexible timelines	Structured timelines (90 days for serious offences)
Forensic Investigation	Optional	Mandatory for serious offences

Continuity and Change

While the BNSS introduces significant changes, it maintains continuity with established legal principles:

The hierarchical structure of courts remains fundamentally similar
The concept of territorial jurisdiction continues
The separation of powers between different court levels is preserved
Constitutional protections for accused persons remain intact[2]

Practical Implications of Chapter 3

For Investigators and Police Officers

Chapter 3’s jurisdictional framework requires police officers to:

Register First Information Reports (FIRs) in appropriate police jurisdictions
Conduct preliminary inquiries to determine prima facie cases
Follow prescribed timelines for investigation completion
Present investigation reports to courts within defined territorial limits

For Prosecutors

Prosecutors must:

File cases in courts with appropriate territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction
Follow procedures prescribed by courts in their respective jurisdictions
Engage with modern evidence collection methods overseen by courts
Ensure victim participation in proceedings as mandated

For Defense Counsel

Defense advocates must:

Understand the jurisdictional limitations and powers of courts
Raise jurisdictional challenges where appropriate
Utilize electronic proceedings options effectively
Ensure client participation through electronic means where permitted

For Victims and Citizens

Chapter 3’s framework ensures:

Cases are decided by appropriately empowered courts
Justice delivery is enhanced through modern procedures
Victims have defined roles in criminal proceedings
Access to justice is facilitated through electronic means[3]

Challenges and Concerns

Jurisdictional Complexity

Despite efforts to clarify, some ambiguities remain regarding:

Determination of jurisdiction in cases involving multiple offences across jurisdictions
Circumstances permitting exercise of jurisdiction beyond territorial limits
Transfer of cases between jurisdictions

Infrastructure Requirements

The electronic proceedings provisions require:

Adequate IT infrastructure across courts
Training for judicial and support staff
Secure digital systems for evidence management
Reliable internet connectivity in all court facilities[4]

Transitional Issues

The shift from CrPC to BNSS creates transitional challenges:

Cases filed under CrPC but decided under BNSS
Consistency in interpretation of corresponding provisions
Training requirements for legal practitioners
Awareness campaigns for the public

Conclusion

Chapter 3 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 establishes a comprehensive framework for criminal court jurisdiction and powers. By clearly delineating the classification of courts, their territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction, and the specific powers vested in them, the chapter provides a robust institutional structure for the delivery of criminal justice in India.

The chapter represents a thoughtful modernization of criminal procedure, incorporating contemporary developments such as electronic proceedings and digital evidence while maintaining the fundamental principles of judicial hierarchy and jurisdictional propriety. The expanded powers of courts reflect an evolutionary approach to justice delivery that accommodates technological advances without compromising procedural safeguards.

For legal practitioners, judicial officers, and citizens, understanding Chapter 3 is essential for effective navigation of India’s criminal justice system. The chapter’s provisions directly impact how cases are filed, processed, and decided, making it a cornerstone of criminal procedure law in the post-BNSS era. As courts implement these provisions and jurisprudence develops around them, Chapter 3 will likely become the subject of significant judicial interpretation and scholarly analysis.

The success of Chapter 3’s implementation will depend on adequate resources, proper infrastructure development, comprehensive training of judicial and support staff, and proactive awareness campaigns to educate the public and legal community about its provisions. With these elements in place, Chapter 3 promises to usher in a more efficient, transparent, and accessible system of criminal justice administration in India.

References

[1] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Preamble and Chapter 1. Government of India, December 25, 2023. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/

[2] Ministry of Home Affairs. (2023). Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Handbook: Key Provisions and Changes vis-à-vis CrPC. Bureau of Police Research and Development.

[3] PRS India. (2023). The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Legislative Brief. Parliament Research Services. https://prsindia.org/billtrack/

[4] Bar and Bench Editorial. (2024). Overview of Criminal Investigations and Trials under BNSS. Bar and Bench, June 24, 2024. https://www.barandbench.com/

[5] Constitution of India in Practice. (2025). Chapters in The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023. Constitutional Law Database. https://constitutionofindia.in/

[6] RSRR Editorial. (2026). Magistrate’s Power to Order Investigation under Section 175(3) of the BNSS. RSRR Jurisprudence, January 28, 2026. https://www.rsrr.in/