DEV Community

Mr.Ashu Singh Rajput
Mr.Ashu Singh Rajput

Posted on

How to Replace IPC Sections with BNS in Ongoing Cases

How to Replace IPC Sections with BNS in Ongoing Cases
One of the most common questions criminal lawyers are facing in 2024 is not about new FIRs or fresh trials, but about ongoing cases:

“My case was registered under IPC. Trial is pending. Do I need to change sections to BNS now?”

With the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), this confusion is natural. The good news is that ongoing cases do not collapse overnight—but your drafting and submissions must now reflect the new law correctly.

This article explains how to replace IPC sections with BNS in ongoing cases safely, practically, and in a court-approved manner.

First principle: Ongoing cases are not invalid
Courts across India recognise that:

FIRs were registered under IPC

charge sheets were filed under IPC

trials commenced under IPC

These proceedings do not become illegal merely because BNS has come into force.

However, from now onwards, courts expect:

awareness of BNS

updated statutory references in fresh applications

clarity during arguments

The shift is procedural and prospective in practice, not destructive of past steps.

What actually needs to be replaced (and what doesn’t)
❌ What you do NOT need to replace
FIR text

charge sheet already filed

past orders and judgments

evidence already recorded

These remain part of the record.

✅ What you SHOULD replace or update
fresh bail applications

interim applications

written submissions

arguments on charge / sentencing

revision or appellate pleadings

In short: future drafting in ongoing cases must speak the language of BNS.

The biggest mistake lawyers make during replacement
Many lawyers try to:

blindly substitute IPC numbers with guessed BNS numbers

delete IPC references completely

use only BNS without context

This creates confusion and invites questions from the bench.

The correct approach is replacement with continuity, not erasure.

The safest method: Dual-reference drafting
Courts currently prefer dual citation, especially in ongoing matters.

Ideal format:
“Section ___ of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section ___ of the Indian Penal Code, 1860)”

This method:

respects the original IPC-based proceedings

aligns with the present statutory framework

avoids confusion for judges reviewing old records

This is the gold standard for 2024–25.

Step-by-step: How to replace IPC sections with BNS
Step 1: Identify IPC sections involved in the case
List:

FIR sections

charge sections

conviction sections (if any)

Do not edit yet—just identify.

Step 2: Find the corresponding BNS provisions
IPC to BNS is not always one-to-one. Some sections are:

renumbered

reorganised

slightly reworded

Using an IPC to BNS converter at this stage prevents costly mistakes and saves time.

Step 3: Update fresh applications only
When drafting:

bail

discharge

compounding

modification

exemption

Use BNS sections with IPC cross-reference.

Avoid filing any new application citing IPC alone.

Step 4: Update oral argument language
Judges may ask:

“What is the section under BNS?”

“What is the punishment now?”

Prepare by:

knowing the BNS equivalent

keeping both IPC and BNS numbers handy

Confidence here matters more than perfect memorisation.

Step 5: Sentencing and final arguments
If the case reaches:

arguments on sentence

probation consideration

You must refer to BNS punishment provisions, even if conviction was under IPC.

This is where correct replacement becomes legally critical.

Special situations in ongoing cases
🔹 Bail matters
Bail applications filed after BNS enforcement should:

cite BNSS procedure

refer to BNS offences

IPC-only bail drafts are increasingly objected to.

🔹 Arguments on charge
Even if the charge sheet cites IPC, courts may:

frame charges mentioning BNS equivalents

seek clarification from counsel

Being prepared avoids embarrassment.

🔹 Appeals & revisions
Here, dual citation is essential:

IPC for historical record

BNS for current law

Replacing IPC blindly in appeal grounds is not advisable.

Why manual replacement is risky
Manual replacement often leads to:

wrong BNS section

incorrect punishment range

mismatch between offence and ingredients

In criminal law, wrong section = weak argument, no matter how good the facts are.

Why conversion tools are now standard practice
An IPC to BNS converter helps you:

replace sections accurately

draft faster

avoid technical objections

maintain consistency across files

train juniors efficiently

It turns a stressful transition into a manageable workflow.

What courts really expect from lawyers
Courts are not testing your memory of new sections. They expect:

legal awareness

drafting accuracy

procedural seriousness

Using BNS correctly shows professional adaptation, not ignorance of IPC.

Final takeaway
Replacing IPC sections with BNS in ongoing cases is not about rewriting history. It is about updating future conduct.

Do not panic. Do not guess. Do not overcorrect.

Instead:

identify IPC references

convert them accurately

use dual citation

align fresh drafting with BNS

In the BNS era, smart replacement is better than rushed replacement.Feel free to refer to our IPC to BNS Converter

Top comments (0)