Introduction:

In a landmark ruling, the Rajasthan High Court has provided crucial clarification on the applicability of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in cases involving crimes committed before July 1, 2024. The court ruled that even if an FIR is lodged after the BNS came into force, for offenses committed before this date, the IPC will still apply, with procedural aspects to be governed by the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The judgment was delivered by Justice Arun Monga in a case involving allegations of fraud and forgery in a family inheritance dispute.

Case Background:

The case concerned an FIR filed on July 27, 2027, alleging crimes under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC. The petitioners sought to quash the FIR, contending that the BNS should apply instead of the IPC, as the FIR was filed after the new laws came into effect. The case revolved around an alleged forgery of a will and fraudulent transfer of property.

Arguments:

Petitioners’ Arguments:

The petitioners argued that since the FIR was filed after July 1, 2024, the BNS should govern the offenses, as the IPC had been repealed by then.

They also claimed the FIR lacked merit and was an attempt to escalate a civil inheritance dispute into a criminal case.

They further contended that procedural elements should follow the BNSS, not the CrPC.

Respondent’s Arguments (State Counsel):

The State maintained that the crime occurred in 2021, prior to the BNS coming into effect, and hence, the IPC should apply to the alleged offense.

The procedural aspects of the case should follow the BNSS, as the FIR was filed after July 1, 2024.

The State also argued that the allegations were serious and warranted a proper investigation.

Court’s Judgment:

• Applicability of IPC:

The court ruled that the IPC would apply to crimes committed before July 1, 2024, even if the FIR was filed afterward, citing Article 20 of the Constitution and Section 358 of the BNS. The ruling reaffirmed that criminal liability is based on the law in effect at the time of the offense.

• No Retrospective Application of BNS:

The court held that the BNS cannot be retrospectively applied for crimes committed under the IPC, citing the Allahabad High Court’s ruling in Deepu vs. State of U.P.

• Procedure Under BNSS:

The court ruled that while the substantive law (IPC) would govern the offenses, the procedural aspects—investigation and trial—would follow the BNSS, as the FIR was registered post-July 1, 2024.

• Quashing the FIR on Merits:

Despite the legal clarity, the court quashed the FIR on the grounds that the allegations of fraud and forgery were exaggerated and stemmed from a family property dispute, better suited for civil litigation.

• Conflict with Punjab & Haryana High Court:

The judgment acknowledged a conflicting view from the Punjab & Haryana High Court but maintained that its interpretation, based on constitutional protections, provided a more consistent legal framework for handling such cases.