Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) And Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Monthly Digest – May 2025

SUPREME COURT PMLA Accused Entitled To Hearing Before Cognizance Is Taken Of ED Complaint Filed After BNSS Came Into Effect: Supreme Court Case Title: Kushal Kumar Agarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 642 The Supreme Court held that before taking cognizance of a money laundering complaint under section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the special court has to give opportunity to the accused to be heard as per the proviso to Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. A bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan quashed the cognizance order passed by the Special Court dated November 20, 2024, after noting that the BNSS, which came effect from July 1, 2024, mandated pre-cognizance hearing of the accused as per Section 223(1). Such a provision was not present in the earlier Code of Criminal Procedure. The bench noted that in Tarsem Lal vs ED, it was held that a complaint filed by Enforcement Directorate under Section 44(1)(b) of PMLA will be governed by Sections 200 to 204 of the CrPC. As a corollary, provisions of chapter 16 (sections 223 to 226 of BNSS) will also apply to the complaint under Section 44 of PMLA. Domestic Violence Act Complaints Can Be Quashed By HCs Under S.482 CrPC/528 BNSS :Supreme Court Case: Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi vs Vidhi Rawal Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 599 The Supreme Court on Monday (May 19) held that High Courts can quash complaints filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in exercise of their inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now S.528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2003). The Court said that in a given case, where a learned Magistrate is dealing with an application under Section 12(1), the High Court can exercise the power under the second part of Section 482 to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or to secure the ends of justice. The High Court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash proceedings of an application under Section 12(1) or orders passed in accordance with Sections 18 to 23 of the DV Act, 2005. At the same time, the bench cautioned that considering the object of the DV Act, the High Court should exercise caution and circumspection when dealing with an application under Section 12(1). DELHI HIGH COURT 'There Has To Be Some Limit To Frivolity': Delhi High Court Raps Litigant For Filing PIL Calling BNS A 'Criminal Act' Of Government Title: Upendra Nath Dalai v. UOI Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 548 The Delhi High Court on Wednesday rapped a litigant for filing a public interest litigation alleging that the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 which replaced the erstwhile Indian Penal Code of 1860, is a “criminal act” of the Government of India. A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela took exception to the petition filed by one Upendra Nath Dalai, based out of Odisha, who was appearing in person. [S.173 BNSS] High Court Slams Delhi & UP Cops For "Passing The Buck", Says Police Can't Refuse To Register FIR Based On Jurisdiction Case title: Khushi Sharma v. Union Of India And Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 567 The Delhi High Court today expressed “serious consternation” and “regret” at the conduct of both the Delhi Police and the Uttar Pradesh Police in failing to register an FIR regarding the mysterious death of a 20-year-old Delhi resident in Greater Noida. At the outset, the Court referred to Section 173 of the BNSS which replaced Section 154 CrPC on registration of FIR and observed that the Legislature has added the words “… irrespective of the - area where the offence is committed…” It held that the intent of the Legislature is therefore that information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence if given orally must be reduced into writing by an officer in-charge of a police station, regardless of where the offence may be stated to have been committed. Delhi High Court Rejects Plea By 'The Wire' Against Summoning Order Passed In Ex-JNU Professor's Defamation Complaint Case title : FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM V/s AMITA SINGH and connected matter Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 574 The Delhi High Court has rejected the pleas moved by Foundation of Independent Journalism, which runs the media platform 'The Wire', and its editor Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprastha challenging an order summoning them on a criminal defamation case filed by former JNU professor Amita Singh. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the petitions challenging the trial court order passed on January 13 summoning them in the defamation case filed by Singh. The court rejected the petitioner's contention that since there was no pending matter against it on July 1, 2024 thus, it is BNSS...

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) And Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Monthly Digest – May 2025

Upasana Sajeev

Tags