Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn
CRPC 297 (Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn) corresponds most closely to BNSS 333, Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn, on a text comparison scoring 100 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 The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed with effect from 01 Jul 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Repealed · Code of Criminal Procedure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 297 Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn
(1) Affidavits to be used before any Court under this Code may be sworn or affirmed before-
1[(a) any Judge or any Judicial or Executive Magistrate, or]
(b) any Commissioner of Oaths appointed by a High Court or Court of Session, or
(c) any notary appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952 (53 of 1952).
(2) Affidavits shall be confined to, and shall state separately, such facts as the deponent is able to prove from his own knowledge and such facts as he has reasonable ground to believe to be true, and in the latter case, the deponent shall clearly state the grounds of such belief.
(3) The Court may order any scandalous and irrelevant matter in the affidavit to be struck out or amended.
In force · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Section 333 Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn
(1) Affidavits to be used before any Court under this Sanhita may be sworn or affirmed before---
(a) any Judge or Judicial or Executive Magistrate; or
(b) any Commissioner of Oaths appointed by a High Court or Court of Session; or
(c) any notary appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952 (53 of 1952).
(2) Affidavits shall be confined to, and shall state separately, such facts as the deponent is able to prove from his own knowledge and such facts as he has reasonable ground to believe to be true, and in the latter case, the deponent shall clearly state the grounds of such belief.
(3) The Court may order any scandalous and irrelevant matter in the affidavit to be struck out or amended.
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.