Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause
Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with compensation for accusation without reasonable cause. If, in any case instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate, one or more persons is or are accused before a Magistrate of any offence triable by a Magistrate, and the Magistrate by whom the case is heard discharges or acquits all or any of the accused, The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
(1) If, in any case instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate, one or more persons is or are accused before a Magistrate of any offence triable by a Magistrate, and the Magistrate by whom the case is heard discharges or acquits all or any of the accused, and is of opinion that there was no reasonable ground for making the accusation against them or any of them, the Magistrate may, by his order of discharge or acquittal, if the person upon whose complaint or information the accusation was made is present, call upon him forthwith 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 ; or, if such person is not present, direct the issue of a summons to him to appear and show cause as aforesaid.
(2) The Magistrate shall record and consider any cause which such complainant or informant may show, and if he is satisfied that there was no reasonable ground for making the accusation, may, for reasons to be recorded make an order that compensation to such amount, not exceeding the amount of fine he is empowered to impose, as he may determine, be
paid by such complainant or informant to the accused or to each or any of them.
(3) The Magistrate may, by the order directing payment of the compensation under sub-section (2), further order that, in default of payment, the person ordered to pay such compensation shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period not exceeding thirty days.
(4) When any person is imprisoned under sub-section (3), the
provisions of sections 68 and 69 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). shall, so far as may be, apply.
(5) No person who has been directed to pay compensation under this section shall, by reason of such order, be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the complaint made or information given by him:
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.
(6) A complainant or informant who has been ordered under sub- section (2) by a Magistrate of the second class to pay compensation exceeding one hundred rupees, may appeal from the order, as if such complainant or informant had been convicted on a trial held by such Magistrate.
(7) When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made in a case which is subject to appeal under sub-section (6), 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 ; and where such order is made in a case which is not so subject to appeal the compensation shall not be paid before the expiration of one month from the date of the order.
(8) The provisions of this section apply to summons-cases as well as to warrant-cases.
CHAP
TRIAL OF SUMMONS-CASES BY MAGISTRATES.
CHAPTER XX
TRIAL OF SUMMONS-CASES BY MAGISTRATES
Section 250, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 273 Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause Text carried over almost unchanged 98%
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.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
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.
-
Rajeswar Tiwari vs Nanda Kishore Roy
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where an employer has made statutory deductions from an employee's salary in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the Income Tax Act (Sections 192-206) and has properly deposited the deducted amounts to the credit of the employee or Central Government as required, allegations of illegal deduction do not disclose a case for criminal prosecution under Sections 406 or 120B IPC. Such disputes are essentially civil in nature and must be resolved through appropriate civil, administrative, or income tax authority channels, not through criminal prosecution. The High Court has an obligation under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of criminal process by quashing proceedings that convert civil disputes into criminal cases, particularly when statutory obligations have been performed and the dispute concerns the legitimacy or correctness of those actions rather than their performance itself.
On this section: Section 250 empowers courts to order acquittal or discharge. The court suggested courts should use this power more frequently to curb frivolous prosecutions motivated by malice.
-
State of Uttarakhand vs State of Uttarakhand
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a trial court acquits accused persons and finds serious defects in investigation, and issues a show cause notice to the investigating officer and State Government regarding compensation, both parties must be given a proper opportunity to file their responses and be heard before the court awards compensation. The compensation cannot be awarded without following principles of natural justice. However, the State cannot escape its constitutional and tortious liability to compensate victims of false implication, and such compensation can be awarded even if no specific provision exists in CrPC, provided proper procedure is followed and the amount is justified based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
On this section: Court's power to award compensation to acquitted accused, though no specific provision exists in CrPC for compensating accused, the court can exercise this power based on constitutional and tortious liability
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 250
What have the courts held on Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Rajeswar Tiwari vs Nanda Kishore Roy (19 Aug 2010) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Section 250 empowers courts to order acquittal or discharge. The court suggested courts should use this power more frequently to curb frivolous prosecutions motivated by malice. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2010 to 2020.
How do I find court cases under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
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: CRPC 250, section 250 CRPC, section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Rajeswar Tiwari vs Nanda Kishore Roy (19 Aug 2010).
What should I read with Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Indian Penal Code 68 (Imprisonment to terminate on payment of fine), Indian Penal Code 69 (Termination of imprisonment on payment of proportional part of fine), so none of them can safely be read on its own. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 273 (Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 250, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.