The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: Evaluating its impact on police and procedural reforms

Abstract

This paper offers an in-depth analysis of India’s groundbreaking criminal code overhaul, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which supplants the Indian Penal Code of 1860. From July 2024, the BNS brings sweeping changes not merely by way of new offence against organized crime, terror, and lynching but also through far-reaching procedural reforms affecting day-to-day policing and judicial practice. It introduces concepts of justice, reparation, and victim-centrism, computerizes police processes with compulsory e-FIRs and video recording, amends custody guidelines, redefines police obligation and responsibility, and enhances investigations and trials with pre-fixed timelines. Based on statutory examination, field notes, and initial implementation reports, the research delves into the complicated interplay of advantages and obstacles, highlighting the need for regular training, infrastructure investment, judicial prudence, and community outreach. The BNS stands as an evolutionary but revolutionary law whose vow of open, effective, and humane criminal justice is contingent on continued multi-institutional effort.

Introduction

With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in late 2023, India has embarked on its most far-reaching criminal law reform since independence. The law supersedes the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of 1860, a colonial relic roundly faulted for outdated notions, wording, and state power–individual rights imbalance. Together with companion laws – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam the BNS redesigns the criminal justice system architecture for the 21st century.

The BNS rollout in July 2024 forces police stations, investigation agencies, and courts to reconfigure long-running habits. Though the public debate tends to focus on the new substantive offences prescribed for mob-lynching, organized crime, and cyberterrorism, the law’s profound effect lies in its procedural changes that fundamentally transform police-public interactions, investigation norms, and trial timelines. Infusing technology mandates, enshrining victims’ rights, curbing arbitrary detention, and widening responsibility frameworks mark an ambitious effort towards changing India’s penal culture to a reparative one.

The article suggests on these borderlines clarifying changes in police roles, custodial policies, forensic integration, procedural timetables, and accountability mechanisms in the face of implementation limitations. It weighs whether the BNS’s vision of reform can overcome practical challenges to provide a more accountable, efficient and credible criminal justice system across India’s diversity.

1. From “Dand” (Punishment) to “Nyaya” (Justice): A Philosophical Reorientation

The BNS pioneers a statutory statement of purpose emphasizing justice, reparation, and victim-centric values, signaling a break from colonial-era penal philosophies focused primarily on punishment. It operationalizes this through:

Community Service as an Alternative Sanction: Lighter offenses like minor theft (worth less than ₹5,000), public drunkenness, default in court appearance, and acts defaming others now face sanctions of community service. Police officers undertake the role of supervision whereby offenders are required to perform tasks of public benefit- for instance, school repairs or flood relief work representing a reconciliatory and restorative inclination.

Mandatory Victim Communication: Victims have the right to receive documented notice and copies of pertinent police records at each phase of investigation. Police failure to communicate in a timely manner invites sanction by the department. This makes victims active participants instead of passive bystanders, encouraging openness and confidence.

Enforced Time Limits: Charge sheets are required to be presented within 60 days of the initial court hearing, and judgments are to be handed over within 45 days of the trial’s end. These legally enforceable deadlines push police and judicial authorities to work quickly on case preparation and adjudication and diminish systemic delays.

Proportionality in Sanctions: By increasing minimum sentences for grave offenses like rape and trafficking, the law enhances deterrence, while redirecting minor offenses to non-custodial, alternative remedies. This enables policing resources to focus on priority crimes and decongests trial courts.

2. Digital Empowerment of Policing and Prosecution

A distinguishing feature of the BNS is its institutionalization of digital means to enhance police efficiency and accountability:

E-FIRs and Zero FIRs: Citizens gain the right to file electronic FIRs from any location, 24/7. The police ensure receipt and digital transmission within 15 days to the jurisdictional station responsible for investigation. This requires upgrading police stations with continuous e-desk operation and robust bandwidth, especially in rural areas. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) Crime and Criminal Tracking Network (CCTNS) underpins the necessary infrastructure.

Electronic Summons Service: Courts are empowered to deliver summons through digital mediums like e-mail and SMS, employing OTP-based confirmation for delivery assurance. This alleviates police logistical loads, requiring credible digital databases to manage contacts and preserve evidence training.

Mandatory Video Recording of Crime Scenes and Forensic Summonses: For serious crimes warranting a minimum of 7 years imprisonment, investigation teams are required to video graph scenes on handheld cameras and summon certified forensic experts. Forensic reports become compulsory enclosures to charge sheets. Failure attracts trial invalidation, prompting police to build capacities for digital evidence collection and inter-agency collaboration with forensic centers.

3. Enhanced Custody, Arrest, and Remand Policies

The BNS updates police powers critically weighing investigative requirements against detainee rights:

Lengthier Custody Period: Police custody for a maximum of 15 days at any point during 40 days of judicial custody can be applied for by investigators in cases of serious offences. As opposed to the earlier 15 day period within the first fortnight, this flexibility benefits follow up interrogations but also increases custodial abuse risks, emphasizing the importance of stringent oversight processes like CCTV and mandatory attendance by defense lawyers.

Arrest Protocols and Accountability: The law clarifies arrest rules making police record necessity in particular for offences punishable up to below 7 years to prevent mass arrests. This resonates with Supreme Court guidelines (Arnesh Kumar guidelines) advocating judicial caution. Increased punishment for police personnel violating lawful instructions or abetting escape of detainees enhances internal discipline.

Controversial Handcuffing Extension: The BNS justifies handcuffing a more wide-ranging category of suspects, causing controversy regarding civil liberties. This requires strict police SOPs weighing security requirements versus constitutional safeguards against indignity, with possible judicial oversight.

4. New Offences, Forensic Obligations, and Evidence Reforms

Organized Crime Under the Main Code: Offences of organized crime and terrorism are for the first time integrated into the main criminal code, moving away from dependency on standalone enactments (e.g., Unlawful Activities Prevention Act). Police need to prove syndicate hierarchy, sharing of profits, and continuity before ordinary courts, leading to creation of specialist investigation units and elaborate collection of financial evidence.

Legislating Against Fake News: The BNS criminalizes the publication or dissemination of false information likely to cause public fear or communal unrest, requiring cyber police to upgrade internet monitoring capacities. Guidelines focusing on mens rea and impact tests become imperative to prevent misuse against dissent.

Substituting Sedition with “Acts Endangering Sovereignty”: Sedition, an anachronistic offence, is put on the backburner, substituted with offence provisions for speech that condones terrorism or secession. Police and magistrates must be educated in constitutional protections surrounding free speech in order to avoid chilling effects on legitimate expression.

Improved Evidence Management: Police have to respond to increased use of digital evidence by maintaining rigorous chain-of-custody, adopting forensic science guidelines, and requiring comprehensive documentation protocols like forensic visit records and video coverage to enhance prosecutorial integrity.

5. Victim-Focused Policing and Gender Sensitive Policy

Augmented Sexual Offence Provisions: Rape minimum punishment increased, particularly against minors. Victim-impact statements and scene videography must be attached to charge sheets. Delay in medical examinations now has disciplinary repercussions for officers.

Management of Promise-to-Marriage Offence: Police guidelines are aimed at sensitivity in probing suspected false sexual relationships, not overstepping in consensual situations while safeguarding vulnerable parties.

In-Depth Framework for Mob Violence: Charges against all members of mob lynching groups give the police the power to act upon collective guilt, aided by technological capabilities such as crowd-sourced video testimony and call data analytics.

6. Challenges in Implementation: Capacity, Technology, and Culture

Training Deficit and Technology Divide: Surveys indicate that only a small percentage of police officers receive training in cyber forensics and digital evidence. Rural stations frequently have no broadband access and necessary hardware, facing the danger of falling back on outmoded paper processes.

Forensic Infrastructure Bottlenecks: The influx of required forensic visits risks overwhelming already strained laboratories with resource constraints, potentially delaying statutory investigation deadlines.

Budgetary Debate: Equipment cost for frontline officers with body cams (₹15,000 each) poses serious fiscal hurdles, especially in high-population states such as Uttar Pradesh, and calls for federal-state budget shifts and grants.

Transition Confusion: Double use of new and old laws in the pilot phase has resulted in procedural complexities for police, magistrates, and lawyers, and requires carefully drafted circulars and constant feedback.

7. Accountability and Oversight: Maintaining Reform Momentum

Expanded Internal Discipline: The BNS lists more than 30 offences of public servant misconduct with heavy sanctions, ranging from falsification to illegal trading, posing a legal necessity for police forces to create compliance dashboards and internal audits.

Judicial Oversight Function: Time-limited investigation requirements compel magistrates to shorten routine remand renewals. Disobedience of procedural requirements like video evidence or service of summons could lead to the dismissal of evidence or acquittal, promoting observance of standards.

Community Faith Building: E-transparency initiatives like e-FIRs and victim notifications improve public faith, minimizing scope for corruption and abuse that conventional hidden processes facilitate.

8. Important Reflections and Issues

Hazards of Prolonged Custody: In the absence of strong monitoring and protection, prolonged police custody days can encourage custodial brutality and human rights violations.

Impact of Digital Divide: The differential implementation of IT infrastructure could exacerbate inequalities, with disadvantaged rural communities threatened by inaccessibility of e-procedures.

Possible Excesses in Provisions Relating to Speech: Wide-ranging criminalization of ‘false news’ or ‘acts threatening sovereignty’ could be taken politically without definite mens rea and judicial oversight, jeopardizing basic rights.

Training and Awareness Shortage: Laggard adaptation of frontline officers and judiciary to new standards can dilute reform effectiveness, requiring comprehensive capacity-building programs.

9. Strategic Roadmap for Efficient Implementation

National Police-Forensic Grid: Synchronized scheduling guarantees forensic specialist visits within 24 hours of reporting of the crime, tracked through performance indicators.

Multilingual E-Learning Platforms: Short, scenario-led training modules combined with certification encourage quick knowledge transfer.

Transparency through Compliance Scorecards: Public dashboards containing statistics on e-FIR handling, forensic inspections, and victim interactions facilitate accountability.

Community Liaison Initiatives: Synchronization of judiciary-imposed community work with local welfare schemes enhances grassroot reconciliation and police-public partnership.

Post-Implementation Review Committee: A hybrid committee of judiciary, police, and civil society to evaluate operational issues, determine legislative loopholes, and suggest incremental improvements within 3 years.

10. Conclusion: A Gradual Yet Ambitious Leap Forward

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is neither a break nor cosmetic tinkering but an ambitious repurposing of the criminal law regime in India. The BNS interlaces technology, procedural discipline, and victim’s rights into policing and delivery of justice, diverging from colonial-era precedence to create a more open, accountable, and humane system. But the law’s potential is contingent on fidelity of implementation: including investment in infrastructure, training on a large scale, judicial reform, and vigilant monitoring. The next few years will show whether India only restyles its criminal justice facade or realizes a substantive shift that enables fair and efficient law enforcement for its enormous citizenry.

References

1. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Act No 45 of 2023 (India, 25 December 2023).
2. Sundaram R and Narayanan M, ‘Reforming India’s Criminal Justice: A Comparative Analysis of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’ (2024) 10(1) Indian Journal of Legal Reform 15.
3. Devi S, ‘Digital Evidence and Cyber-Offences under the New Indian Penal Code’ (2025) 3(2) Journal of Cyber Law Studies 47.
4. Kapoor A and Mehta P, ‘Sentencing and Punishments: Evaluating the Sanhita’s New Framework’ (2024) 29(4) Criminal Justice Review 301.
5. Chatterjee J, ‘General Exceptions and Legal Defences: Interpretive Challenges in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’ (2024) 16(3) Legal Theory & Practice 201.
6. Iyer L, ‘Offences against Women and Children: Innovations and Limitations in the 2023 Code’ (2025) 12(1) International Journal of Gender and Law 59.
7. R V Singh, ‘The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: Consolidation of Criminal Law in India’ (2024) 56 Indian Bar Review 119.
8. A Kumar, ‘Juvenile Justice under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’ (2025) 8 Journal of Indian Law and Society 33.
9. S Banerjee, ‘Digital Evidence and the New Definitions of “Document” in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’ (2024) 12 Cyber Law Review 87.
10. T Rao, ‘Public Order and the General Exceptions: A Critical Analysis of Chapters II and III of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’ (2025) 29 National Journal of Constitutional Law 201.
11. M Sharma, ‘Sentencing Patterns under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: A Comparative Study’ (2024) 14 Indian Penal Code Studies 47.
12. P Desai, ‘The Right to Private Defence in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Evolution and Challenges’ (2025) 19 Defence Law Journal 105.
13. L Menon, ‘Abetment and Conspiracy under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’ (2024) 7 Criminal Law Review 224.