CrPC 465 vs BNSS 511: Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity
Section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is now section 511 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, in force from 1 July 2024. 99% of the old wording is kept; 2 words removed and 2 words added.
Struck out: only in the old section. Marked: new in the new section. Punctuation and capitals are ignored when matching words.
CrPC section 465Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity
(1) Subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, no finding, sentence or order passed by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be reversed or altered by a Court of appeal, confirmation of revision on account of any error, omission or irregularity in the complaint, summons, warrant, proclamation, order, judgment or other proceedings before or during trial or in any inquiry or other proceedings under this Code, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution, unless in the opinion of that Court, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby. (2) In determining whether any error, omission or irregularity in any proceeding under this Code, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution has occasioned a failure of justice, the Court shall have regard to the fact whether the objection could and should have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings.
BNSS section 511Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity
(1) Subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, no finding, sentence or order passed by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be reversed or altered by a Court of appeal, confirmation of revision on account of any error, omission or irregularity in the complaint, summons, warrant, proclamation, order, judgment or other proceedings before or during trial or in any inquiry or other proceedings under this Sanhita, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution, unless in the opinion of that Court, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby. (2) In determining whether any error, omission or irregularity in any proceeding under this Sanhita, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution has occasioned a failure of justice, the Court shall have regard to the fact whether the objection could and should have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings.
Text of both sections from India Code, as in our Bare Acts library. Footnotes and amendment notes are on the section pages. Find any other section with the section converter.