Summary: This article aims to analyse the Draft Reserve Bank of India (Know Your Customer) Amendment Directions, 2026 in light of the current legislative and judicial framework and practical challenges faced by entities and individuals upon debit-freezing of accounts in relation to financial crimes and cyber frauds.
Continue Reading Towards Certainty: RBI’s Draft Directions on Debit Freeze
Summary: The article examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanofi India Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, which lays down a three-stage framework for determining when a natural person’s act and mens rea may be attributed to a company. The judgment is significant because it brings structure to a previously unsettled area of corporate criminal liability and makes a company’s decision-making authority, delegation framework and transaction-specific governance record central to the attribution analysis.
Continue Reading Corporate Criminal Liability: Supreme Court Lays Down a Three-Stage Framework for Attributing Mens REA to Companies
Summary: A magistrate takes cognizance of an offence on a private complaint prior to examining the complainant on oath under Section 200 of the CrPC, 1973. However, BNSS, 2023, has upset this settled position. Like the erstwhile Section 200 of the CrpC, Section 223 of the BNSS too confers a similar duty on the magistrate to examine the complainant on oath. But the newly-introduced proviso to Section 223(1) (absent under Section 200 CrPC) mandates that the accused must be heard prior to the magistrate taking cognizance of the offence. This is the point at which divergence arises, raising the issue of whether cognizance is taken before or after the examination of the complainant? High Courts in India, including the Delhi High Court, have interpreted Section 223(1) of the BNSS to imply that the magistrate must firstexamine the complainant on oath, then issue notice to the accused, and only take cognizance at the time of hearing the accused. However, several Supreme Court judgements have held cognizance as already been taken if the magistrate proceeds to examine the complainant on oath. The Delhi High Court took note of this variance in its judgement in Dr Rita Bakshi v. Seema Bajaj and has further referred the issue for consideration by a larger bench.
Continue Reading Should cognizance be taken before or after examination of complainant on oath? Delhi High Court refers matter to larger bench
Summary: A persistent misconception in legal discourse is that findings or determinations of a civil court are binding on a criminal court, despite no such rule being codified in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, or its successor statute, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. This belief often leads to the argument that a civil judgment should conclusively govern subsequent criminal proceedings. However, this position does not reflect the true legal framework. The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Prem Raj v. Poonamma Menon & Anr., tracing the evolution of law on this point, provides much-needed clarity, reaffirming the distinct nature, standards of proof, and purposes of civil and criminal proceedings, and explaining the limited evidentiary value, rather than absolute binding effect, of civil court findings in criminal trials.
Continue Reading Findings of a Civil Court binding on Criminal Court? SC clears the air
Summary: The proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS, 2023, stipulates that a Magistrate shall not take cognizance of an offence without first affording the accused an opportunity to be heard. By its judgement in Kushal Kumar Agarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement[1] (“Kushal Kumar”),the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clarified that this safeguard under the BNSS shall also apply to complaints filed under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”), after July 1, 2024, viz. the date BNSS came into force. The ratio from Kushal Kumar has since been followed inter alia by the High Courts of Delhi and Kerala. These judgements reinforce a significant procedural safeguard for accused persons even under the stringent PMLA, while highlighting a marked departure from the regime under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”). An associated issue is whether cognizance on a supplementary complaint under the PMLA, filed after July 1, 2024, will also be bound by the safeguard of Section 223(1) of the BNSS, if cognizance on the main complaint was taken prior to July 1, 2024.
Continue Reading BNSS and the pre-cognizance imperative: Procedural safeguard u/s 223 applies even to PMLA Complaints
Summary: Extending gifts and hospitality to Indian government officials, while culturally customary, presents significant legal and reputational risks under India’s anti-corruption framework. This article examines monetary thresholds, ministerial restrictions, and the practical implications of India’s anti-bribery law while providing organisations with actionable strategies to build the “adequate procedures” defence, which stands as the only statutory shield against corporate criminal liability.
Continue Reading To Gift or Not To Gift: A Guide to Gifts and Hospitality to Indian Government Officials
Summary: The power to quash a criminal matter under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482, CrPC, 1973), is well settled. It is a power to be exercised sparingly, within well accepted parameters, including no offence being disclosed, malice, abuse of criminal process, etc. If such relevant factors otherwise stand fulfilled, there is no bar to quashing an FIR, even if the investigation is at a preliminary/ nascent stage.
Continue Reading Nascent stage of investigation no bar for quashing: Supreme Court clarifies High Court’s power under Section 528 BNSS
Summary: This blog clarifies the prior steps that must be taken before approaching a magistrate with an application under Section 156(3) CrPC- with reference to a recent judgement of the Supreme Court in Anurag Bhatnagar. We explain how the judgement in Anurag Bhatnagar ought not to be taken as a blanket exemption from the pursuing the prior steps.
Continue Reading Steps under Section 154 CrPC no longer mandatory? Judgment in Anurag Bhatnagar-unique outlier or shift in jurisprudence?
Summary: In this article, we discuss the concept of cancellation of bail in the backdrop of a recent judgment of the Supreme Court that trial courts are empowered to cancel bail granted by higher courts if bail conditions are violated.
Continue Reading Breaking the Hierarchy – Power of the Trial Courts to Cancel Bail Granted by Higher Courts
Summary: This blog compares Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), with Section 200 of the erstwhile Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“CrPC”). The analysis highlights how the new provision introduces an additional safeguard against prosecution for non-executive directors.
Continue Reading Criminal Liability of Non-Executive Directors: A New Ray of Hope