The Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 (CrPC) has now been replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). Forensic investigations are required by BNSS for offenses carrying a minimum sentence of seven years in prison. To gather forensic evidence and document the procedure, forensic specialists will go to crime scenes.

Any and all hearings, investigations, and trials may be conducted electronically. Production of electronic communication devices will be permitted for a trial, investigation, or inquiry as they are likely to contain digital evidence. A proclaimed offender may be tried and a verdict rendered in his absence if he has fled to avoid prosecution and there is no immediate chance that he will be apprehended. For an inquiry or legal procedure, finger impressions, voice samples, and specimen signatures or handwriting may be gathered. It is possible to obtain samples from someone who is not in custody.

Key Issues
Within the first 40 or 60 days of the 60 or 90 days of court custody, the BNSS permits up to 15 days of police custody, which may be authorized in segments. If the authorities do not use up all 15 days of custody, this could result in the full bail amount being denied.

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act does not include any protections for the authority to attach property obtained from criminal activity. If an accused person has been detained for half the maximum sentence for the offense, the CrPC allows for bail. The BNSS refuses to allow anyone with numerous charges to use this facility. This may restrict such bail because numerous cases involve charges under several provisions. Contrary to Supreme Court orders, handcuffs may be used in a variety of situations, including economic offenses. The BNSS also permits investigative officers who have resigned or been reassigned to provide evidence they have acquired through their successors.

When the document's creator is subject to a cross-examination, this defies accepted principles of evidence. The BNSS does not include the recommendations of high-level committees on modifications to the CrPC, such as updating sentence guidelines and codifying the rights of the accused.

A procedural legislation known as the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) was created to administer the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). It controls the process for looking into crimes, making an arrest, prosecuting them, and setting bail. To solve the issue of India's multiple legal systems, the CrPC was initially passed in 1861. It has undergone several revisions since then. The previous statute was repealed and the current CrPC took its place in 1973.

Anticipatory bail was also adopted during this time. It was revised in 2005 to include new clauses pertaining to rights of arrested individuals and plea bargaining. On August 11, 2023, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) was unveiled as the replacement for the CrPC. It modifies bail terms, broadens the use of property seizure, and changes the authority of police and magistrates. The Standing Committee on Home Affairs has reviewed the Bill.

The Bill might give the police more authority. The Criminal Procedure Code regulates the authority of law enforcement to uphold public safety, deter criminal activity, and conduct criminal inquiries. Arrests, incarceration, searches, seizures, and the use of force are among these authorities. These authorities are limited in order to protect people from the abuse of police power that results in the disproportionate use of force, unlawful detentions, torture of inmates, and abuse of power. To stop such capricious use of police power, the Supreme Court has also released a number of directives. There may be some problems as a result of the Bill's amendments to the laws pertaining to detention, police custody, and the use of handcuffs.

An Analysis Of The Issues Raised
Detention in police custody for more than 24 hours is forbidden by the Constitution and the CrPC. [1]If the inquiry cannot be finished in a day, the magistrate has the authority to extend it for up to fifteen days. If he is convinced that there are sufficient reasons to do so, he may decide to prolong judicial custody beyond the initial 15 days.

Overall incarceration, though, is limited to 60 or 90 days. This process is now modified by the BNSS. It further states that during the first 40 or 60 days of the 60 or 90-day term, the authorization of the 15-day police custody may be granted in full or in part. In the event that the police contend that they must re-arrest the subject, bail may be refused during this time.

The accused's personal liberty may be violated by the authority to employ handcuffs. The use of handcuffs during an arrest is permitted by the BNSS. Only two people may be arrested with handcuffs: (i) a habitual or repeat criminal who has escaped from detention; or (ii) an individual who is suspected of committing crimes including rape, acid attacks, organized crime, economic offenses, or actions that jeopardize India's sovereignty, unity, or integrity. The clause goes against both National Human Rights Commission standards and Supreme Court rulings. [2]According to the Supreme Court, handcuffing someone is cruel, irrational, arbitrary, and against Article 21.[3]

When handcuffs must be used in dire circumstances, the escorting authority is required to document the circumstances. It has also decided that no prisoner awaiting trial may be handcuffed without a judge's approval. [4]As a result, the trial court has been given the freedom to determine whether or not to deploy handcuffs. The Standing Committee (2023) suggested that economic offenses be taken out of the list of offenses for which handcuffs may be used. Handcuffs should only be applied if there is a possibility of violence or if there is a good chance the suspect would elude capture, according to a dissent note in the Committee report.

Plea bargaining is an arrangement in which the prosecution and defense agree that the accused will admit guilt in exchange for a less sentence or a lesser offense. Crimes carrying the death penalty, life in prison, or a sentence longer than seven years in jail are prohibited. The Criminal Procedure Code prohibits the striking of a plea deal for a less serious offense or for compounding the offense; instead, the accused is presumed to have admitted guilt and been found guilty of the crime.

This clause is kept in the BNSS. This means that in India, plea bargaining is limited to sentence bargaining, which is the process of accepting a guilty plea in exchange for a reduced sentence. The BNSS also includes a requirement that the accused submit an application for plea negotiating no later than thirty days following the date the charge was framed. Due to the limited window of time, plea bargaining may not be as successful in obtaining a reduced sentence.

Conclusion
The long-standing Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 (CrPC) now replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), marking a substantial change in the procedural framework controlling the criminal justice system in India. The BNSS brings about a number of changes, including as the requirement for forensic investigations in cases of significant offenses, the use of computerized procedures for trials and hearings, and the gathering of digital and biometric data. Although the Bill presents a number of important concerns, these modifications seek to modernize and simplify the procedure.

The BNSS permits prolonged police detention during the entirety of court custody, which can violate the right to bond. The option to refuse bail if a person has not used all of their days in police custody could result in extended incarcerations without charge or trial. The legal environment is made more complex by the Prevention of Money Laundering Act's lack of protections for property attachment and its restrictions on bail for defendants facing numerous offenses.

Furthermore, the BNSS's approval of the use of handcuffs in some serious and economic offenses goes against both human rights norms and Supreme Court orders. The BNSS seeks to expand police powers for investigating crimes and ensuring public safety, but as previous Supreme Court orders limiting disproportionate police power have shown, there is a risk of abuse and misuse of this expanded authority. The Bill strikes a balance between procedural efficiency and individual rights with its changes to detention and custody processes and its position on plea bargaining, but it also raises questions regarding the preservation of personal liberties.

End Notes:

1. Article 22, The Constitution of India, 1950
2. Section 51, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
3. Guidelines regarding Arrest, National Human Rights Commission
4. 1980 AIR 1535, Prem Shankar Shukla vs. Delhi Administration, Supreme Court, April 29, 1980
5. 1995 3 SCC 743, Citizens for Democracy v. State of Assam, May 1, 1995