Permission to conduct prosecution
Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with permission to conduct prosecution. Any Magistrate inquiring into or trying a case may permit the prosecution to be conducted by any person other than a police officer below the rank of inspector; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Any Magistrate inquiring into or trying a case may permit the prosecution to be conducted by any person other than a police officer below the rank of inspector; but no person, other than the Advocate-General or Government Advocate or a Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor, shall be entitled to do so without such permission:
Provided that no police officer shall be permitted to conduct the prosecution if he has taken part in the investigation into the offence with respect to which the accused is being prosecuted.
(2) Any person conducting the prosecution may do so personally or by an advocate.
Section 339, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 302 Permission to conduct prosecution Text carried over almost unchanged 99%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Sister Mina Lalitha Baruwa vs State of Orissa
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 302, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal proceedings involving allegations of grave offences such as rape, where a statutory witness (particularly a judicial officer) makes oral testimony that directly contradicts documentary evidence prepared by that witness himself, and such contradiction is brought to the trial court's notice by the victim or any party, the trial court is duty-bound under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall and re-examine that witness if the evidence appears essential to the just decision of the case. This duty arises independently of whether the victim invokes Section 301 Cr.P.C. (which limits victim's prosecution role), because the proper reconciliation of Sections 301 and 311 permits victims to bring material errors to court's notice, and courts must respond by invoking their broad powers under Section 311 to rectify glaring contradictions. Courts cannot remain passive spectators when such irregularities are brought to notice; they must maintain an active, participatory role to prevent miscarriage of justice. The court's duty is not conditioned by delay if the error is material and affects the just decision of the case.
On this section: Mentioned in context of victim's limited prosecution rights before magistrate courts
-
Rashida Kamaluddin Syed vs Shaikh Saheblal Maradn (d) Th. Lrs.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 302, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Upon the death of a complainant in a criminal case, the proceedings do not abate. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not expressly provide for abatement of inquiries and trials upon death of a complainant. Legal heirs of a deceased complainant can be validly permitted by the court to continue the criminal prosecution against the accused under Section 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (corresponding to Section 495 of the old Code). This principle applies to all criminal cases based on the scheme of the Code and is not limited to cases triable by the Court of Session or cases involving any particular level of offence. Once such permission is granted by the court and is not challenged by the accused, it attains finality and cannot be subsequently challenged as illegal or unlawful.
On this section: Permission to conduct prosecution by persons below rank of Inspector - Applied to permit legal heirs to conduct prosecution in place of deceased complainant
-
M. T. Khan vs Govt. A. P.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 302, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Only one Advocate General can hold the constitutional office under Article 165 of the Constitution of India. The singular form 'Advocate General' in Article 165 must be interpreted literally as singular and cannot be extended to include plural 'Advocate Generals'. However, a State may appoint additional legal counsel and designate them as Additional Advocate Generals under its executive power under Article 162, provided such persons are not authorized to perform any constitutional or statutory functions reserved for the Advocate General. The constitutional scheme contemplates only one person holding the constitutional office to ensure consistency and prevent chaos in the performance of constitutional and statutory functions.
On this section: Cited as a statutory function performed by the Advocate General that cannot be delegated to Additional Advocate Generals
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 339
What have the courts held on Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Sister Mina Lalitha Baruwa vs State of Orissa (05 Dec 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 302, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Mentioned in context of victim's limited prosecution rights before magistrate courts. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2013.
How do I find court cases under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 339, section 339 BNSS, section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 339 2 and 339 bnss in crpc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sister Mina Lalitha Baruwa vs State of Orissa (05 Dec 2013).
What should I read with Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward CrPC 302 (Permission to conduct prosecution), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 339, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.