Procedure in cases instituted under section 199(2)
CRPC 237 (Procedure in cases instituted under section 199(2)) corresponds most closely to BNSS 260, Procedure in cases instituted under sub-section (2) of section 222, on a text comparison scoring 93 per cent. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed with effect from 01 Jul 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Repealed · Code of Criminal Procedure
Section 237 Procedure in cases instituted under section 199(2)
(1) A Court of Session taking cognizance of an offence under sub-section (2) of section 199 shall try the case in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted otherwise than on a police report before a Court of Magistrate :
Provided that the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed shall, unless the Court of Session, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs, be examined as a witness for the prosecution.
(2) Every trial under this section shall be held in camera if either party thereto so desires or if the Court thinks fit so to do.
(3) If, in any such case, the Court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of opinion that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation against them or any of them, it may, by its order of discharge or acquittal, direct the person against whom the offence was alleged to have been committed (other than the President, Vice-President or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory) to show cause why he should not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused, when there are more than one.
(4) The Court shall record and consider any cause which may be shown by the person so directed, and if it is satisfied that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation, it may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order that compensation to such amount not exceeding one thousand rupees, as it may determine, be paid by such person to the accused or to each or any of them.
(5) Compensation awarded under sub-section (4) shall be recovered as if it were a fine imposed by a Magistrate.
(6) No person who has been directed to pay compensation under subsection (4) shall, by reason of such order, be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the complaint made under this section ;
Provided that any amount paid to an accused person under this section shall be taken into account in awarding compensation to such person in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter.
(7) The person who has been ordered under sub-section (4) to pay compensation may appeal from the order, in so far as it relates to the
payment of compensation, to the High Court.
(8) When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made, the compensation shall not be paid to him before the period allowed for the presentation of the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal is presented, before the appeal has been decided.
CHAP
TRIAL OF WARRANT-CASES BY MAGISTRATES.
CHAPTER XIX
TRIAL OF WARRANT-CASES BY MAGISTRATES
A.-Cases instituted on a police report
In force · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Section 260 Procedure in cases instituted under sub-section (2) of section 222
(1) A Court of Session taking cognizance of an offence under sub-section (2) of section 222 shall try the case in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted otherwise than on a police report before a Court of Magistrate:
Provided that the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed shall, unless the Court of Session, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs, be examined as a witness for the prosecution.
(2) Every trial under this section shall be held in camera if either party thereto so desires or if the Court thinks fit so to do.
(3) If, in any such case, the Court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of opinion that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation against them or any of them, it may, by its order of discharge or acquittal, direct the person against whom the offence was alleged to have been committed (other than the President, the Vice-President or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory) to show cause why he should not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused, when there are more than one.
(4) The Court shall record and consider any cause which may be shown by the person so directed, and if it is satisfied that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation, it may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order that compensation to such amount not exceeding five thousand rupees, as it may determine, be paid by such person to the accused or to each or any of them.
(5) Compensation awarded under sub-section (4) shall be recovered as if it were a fine imposed by a Magistrate.
(6) No person who has been directed to pay compensation under sub-section (4) shall, by reason of such order, be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the complaint made under this section:
Provided that any amount paid to an accused person under this section shall be taken into account in awarding compensation to such person in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter.
(7) The person who has been ordered under sub-section (4) to pay compensation may appeal from the order, in so far as it relates to the payment of compensation, to the High Court.
(8) When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made, the compensation shall not be paid to him before the period allowed for the presentation of the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal is presented, before the appeal has been decided.
Other provisions with similar text
The next closest matches, in order. Where a provision was split or merged, the answer is often more than one of these.
How this table was made, and what it is not
There is no official machine-readable correspondence between the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Ministry published comparison charts for human readers; nothing exists that a computer can check. So this is not an official mapping and we do not present it as one.
What it measures is how alike the text of two provisions is. For each provision of the old enactment we compare its words against every provision of the new one and report the closest, with the score. That works here because the new codes are largely a renumbering rather than a rewrite: where a provision carried over near-verbatim the match is self-evidencing, and you can see it for yourself, because both texts are set out side by side on every entry.
Where the law genuinely changed, the score falls and the entry says no close match found rather than offering a guess. Those entries matter: they are where the reform actually did something.
Check before you cite. A high score means the words are alike, not that a court has held the provisions equivalent. For that, read both texts and the Gazette.
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. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.