Compounding of offences
Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with compounding of offences. The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal Code specified in the first two columns of the Table next following may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table:- TABLE Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be co 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 Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried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) The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal Code specified in the first two columns of the Table next following may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table:-
TABLE
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3
Uttering words, etc., with 298 The person whose reli- deliberate intent to wound gious feelings are in- the religious feelings of tended to be compoun- any person. ded.
Causing hurt------------- 323, 334 The person to whom the hurt is caused.
Wrongfully restraining or 341, 342 The person restrained or confining any person. confined.
Assault or use of criminal 352, 355, 358 The person assaulted or force. to whom criminal force is used.
Mischief, when the only loss 426, 427 The person to whom the
or damage caused is loss or loss or damage is caused. damage to a private person.
Criminal trespass------------- 447 The person in possession of the property tre- spassed upon.
House-trespass----------- 448 Ditto.
Criminal breach of contract 491 The person with whom the of service. offender has contracted.
Adultery---------------- 497 The husband of the woman.
Enticing or taking away or 498 Ditto. detaining with criminal in- tent a married woman.
[Defamation, except such 500 The person defamed. cases as are specified against section 500 of the Indian Penal Code in column 1 of the Table under sub-section (2).]
Printing or engraving matter, 501 Ditto. knowing it to be defamatory.
Sale of printed or engraved 502 Ditto. substance containing defa- matory matter, knowing it to contain such matter.
Subs. by Act 45 of 1978, s. 25, for "defamation" (w. e. f. 18- 12-1978).
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3
Insult intended to provoke 504 The person insulted. a breach of the peace.
Criminal intimidation except 506 The person intimidated. when the offence is punish- able with imprisonment for seven years.
Act caused by making a person 508 The person against whom believe that he will be an the offence was commi- object of divine displeasure. tted.
(2) The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal (45 of 1860) Code specified in the first two columns of the Table next following may, with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending, be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table:
TABLE
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3
Voluntarily causing hurt by 324 The person to whom hurt dangerous weapons or means. is caused.
Voluntarily causing grievous 325 Ditto. hurt.
Voluntarily causing grievous 335 Ditto. hurt on grave and sudden provocation.
Causing hurt by doing an act 337 Ditto, so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others.
Causing grievous hurt by 338 Ditto. doing an act so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others.
Wrongfully confining a person 343 The person confined. for three days or more.
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3 Wrongfully confining for ten 344 The person confined. or more days.
Wrongfully confining a person 346 Ditto. in secret.
Assault or criminal force to 354 The woman assulted to woman with intent to outrage whom the criminal force her modesty. was used.
Assault or criminal force in 357 The person assaulted or attempting wrongfully to con- to whom the force was fine a person. used.
Theft, where the value of 379 The owner of the pro- property stolen does not perty stolen. exceed two hundred and fifty rupees.
Theft, by clerk or servant 381 Ditto. of property in possession of master, where the value of the property stolen does not exceed two hundred and fifty rupees.
Dishonest misappropriation 403 The owner of the property of property misappropriated.
Criminal breach of trust, 406 The owner of the property where the value of the pro- in respect of which the perty does not exceed two breach of trust has been hundred and a fifty rupees. committed.
Criminal breach of trust, 407 Ditto. by a carrier, wharfinger, etc., where the value of the property does not exc- eed two hundred and afifty rupees.
Criminal breach of trust by 408 Ditto. a clerk or servant, where the value of the property does not exceed two hundred and fifty rupees.
Dishonestly, receiving 411 The owner of the property stolen property, knowing stolen. it to be stolen, when the value of the stolen pro- perty does not exceed two hundred and fifty rupees.
Assuming in the concealment 414 Ditto. or disposal of stolen pro- perty, knowing it to be stolen, where the value of the stolen property does not exceed two hundred and fifty rupees.
Cheating. --------- 417 The person cheated.
Cheating a person whose in- 418 Ditto. terest the offender was bound, either by law or by legal contract, to protect.
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3
Cheating by personation 419 The person cheated.
Cheating and dishonestly in- 420 Ditto. ducing delivery of property or the making alternation or distruction of a valuable security.
Fraudulent removal over 421 The creditors who are concealment of property, affected thereby. etc., to prevent distribution among creditors.
Fraudulently preventing from 422 Ditto. being made available for his creditors a debt or demand due to the offender.
Fraudulent execution of deed 423 The person affacted of transfer containing false thereby. statement of consideration.
Fraudulent removal or con- 424 Ditto. cealment of property.
Mischief by killing or mai- 428 The owner of the animal. ming animal of the value of ten rupees or upwards.
Mischief by killing or mai- 429 The owner of the cattle ming cattle, etc., of any or animal. value or any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards.
Mischief by injury to work of 430 The person to whom the
irrigation by wrongfuly diver- the loss or damage is ting water when the only loss caused. or damage caused is loss or damage to a private person.
House-trespass to commit an 451 The person in possession offence (other than theft) of the house trespassed punishable with imprisonment. upon.
Using a false trade or pro- 482 The person to whom loss perty mark or injury is caused by such use.
Counterfeiting a trade or 483 The person whose trade or property mark used by anot- property mark is counter- her. feited.
Knowingly selling, or expo- 486 Ditto. sing or possessing for sale or for manufacturing purpose, goods marked with a counter- feit property mark.
Marrying again during the 494 The husband or wife of lifetime of a husband or wife. the person so marrying.
Section of the Indian Offence Penal Code Person by whom offence applicable may be compounded
1 2 3
Defamation against the Presi- 500 The person defamed. dent or the Vice-President or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory or a Minister in respect of his conduct in the discharge of his public functions when instituted upon a complaint made by the Public Prosecutor.
Uttering words or sounds or 509 The woman whom it was making gestures or exhibiting intended to insult or any object intending to insult whose privacy was intru- the modesty of a woman or in- ded upon. truding upon the privacy of
a woman.
(3) When any offence is compoundable under this section, the abetment of such offence or an attempt to commit such offence (when such attempt is itself an offence) may be compounded in like manner.
(4) (a) When the person who would otherwise be competent to com- pound an offence under this section is under the age of eighteen years or is an idiot or a lunatic, any person competent to contract on his behalf may, with the permission of the Court, compound such offence.
(b) When the person who would otherwise be competent to compound an offence under this section is dead, the legal representative, as defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), of such person may, with the consent of the Court, compound such offence.
(5) When the accused has been committed for trial or when he has been convicted and an appeal is pending, no composition for the offence shall be allowed without the leave of the Court to which he is committed, or, as the case may be, before which the appeal is to be heard.
(6) A High Court or Court of Session acting in the exercise of its powers of revision under section 401 may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound under this section.
(7) No offence shall be compounded if the accused is, by reason of a previous conviction, liable either to enhanced punishment or to a punishment of a different kind for such offence.
(8) The composition of an offence under this section shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded.
(9) No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section.
Section 320, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 359 Compounding of offences Close, with changes 85%
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.
This section refers to
Referred to by 1
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.
-
Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-4.pdf 2014-03-27 labelled Judgment (not same-date ROP order-5). Crl A 686/2014. Sikri J. DATE-CHECK flagged 2013-10-08 HC date, 2010-07-14 FIR and 2013-07-22 compromise from the facts (false positive); the body is the 2014 reportable. CrPC 320 compounding is not the same as s.482 quashing. Heinous offences (including a true s.307) are not to be quashed on a private settlement; but a 307 charge that appears over-added on the injury/weapon/timing of settlement may still be quashed. Gian Singh 2012 PDF was ROP-only; this is the labelled teaching file for s.320. Do not remap CrPC 482 (already filled).
On this section: s.320 compounding is not interchangeable with s.482 quashing. Offences listed as compoundable are personal; a true s.307 IPC is against society and is not to be compounded. High Courts may still quash an over-added 307 on injury/weapon/timing of settlement (Narinder Singh).
-
J. Ramesh Kamath vs Mohana Kurup
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal charges involving misappropriation of organizational funds by office bearers in positions of fiduciary trust cannot be characterized as purely personal or civil disputes amenable to quashing under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code based on settlement agreements, even when accepted by all parties including complaining members and current office bearers. The High Court must refuse to quash criminal proceedings in such cases because they involve crimes of breach of trust against the organization and society, and the timing of settlement after completion of investigation and charge-sheet filing demands that the trial court be allowed to determine guilt or innocence on evidence presented at trial. The distinction between Section 320 (compounding) and Section 482 (inherent jurisdiction) does not permit circumvention of the principles that serious offences involving breach of organizational trust and fiduciary duty are not amenable to settlement, regardless of whether all parties subsequently agree to compromise.
On this section: Compounding of offences - discussed as the legal mechanism to settle criminal cases for compoundable offences only; distinguished from Section 482 jurisdiction
-
Jik Industries Ltd. vs Amarlal V. Jumani
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Approval and sanction of a scheme of compromise and arrangement under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 does not have the effect of automatically compounding an offence under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The offence, if committed prior to the scheme, does not stand automatically compounded by virtue of the scheme sanction. Compounding of criminal offences, including those under the NI Act, requires the explicit consent of the complainant or person aggrieved, and this consent cannot be assumed or implied from the sanction of a corporate restructuring scheme. The statutory procedure for compounding prescribed in Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 applies to compounding of NI Act offences despite the non obstante clause in Section 147 of the NI Act, as Section 147 only makes offences compoundable but does not prescribe the mode and manner of such compounding.
On this section: Comprehensive provisions for compounding offences including requirement of consent; Court held these provisions apply to NI Act offences despite Section 147
-
Gulab Das vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While offences punishable under Section 307 IPC (attempt to cause death) are non-compoundable under Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code and cannot be compounded even with settlement between parties, the settlement/compromise between the parties can be taken into consideration by the Court as a mitigating factor when determining the quantum of sentence to be imposed. In cases where parties have reconciled, especially in old matters involving family relationships where the accused were young at the time of incident and have already served substantial portions of their sentences, the Court may reduce the sentence to the period already undergone, thereby giving effect to the settlement while maintaining the conviction.
On this section: Defines compoundable and non-compoundable offences; Section 307 IPC is explicitly non-compoundable
-
Raja Ram Kashyap vs State of U. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code are compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and where the parties have settled their dispute, they may apply to the competent court for permission to compound such offences. The court, if satisfied that the persons authorized by the statute are applying for compounding, shall permit the compounding of the offence.
On this section: Provides the framework for compounding of offences; permits compounding of specified offences with the permission of the court before which the prosecution is pending, by the persons mentioned in the table provided in the statute
-
Puttaswamy vs State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Even if an offence under the Indian Penal Code is non-compoundable within the scope of Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Supreme Court, exercising its discretionary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, may reduce the sentence imposed while maintaining the conviction in view of a compromise arrived at between the parties, particularly when the interests of justice are better served by substantial compensation to the victim's family rather than custodial imprisonment, thereby achieving a pragmatic and equitable solution that recognizes the settlement while preserving the criminal law's adjudication of wrongfulness.
On this section: Compounding Of Certain Offences - Discussed extensively as the key statutory limitation preventing compounding of Section 304-A offences; central to the court's reasoning about why traditional compounding was not available but discretionary relief could be granted
-
Raja Ram Kashyap vs State of U. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code are compoundable offences, and when the authorized persons (the person to whom property hurt is caused for Section 406, and the owner of property for Section 420) wish to compound the offence with court permission under Section 320(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court shall permit such compounding and facilitate the settlement of the criminal dispute.
On this section: Provides the mechanism for compounding offences specified in the statutory table with court permission by authorized persons - the court applied this section to permit the parties to compound the offences
-
Manoj vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An offence under Section 324 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means) remains compoundable with the permission of the Court under Section 320(2) Cr.P.C. as long as the Cr.P.C. (Amendment) Act 2005 has not been brought into force. Upon valid and voluntary compounding of such an offence by the person to whom hurt is caused, based on sufficient and genuine grounds including reconciliation and family relations, the Court is empowered to set aside the conviction and sentence, thereby allowing rehabilitation of the offenders within the community.
On this section: Specifies offences under IPC that may be compounded by named persons without court permission
-
Dasan vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When evidence does not consistently and certainly establish the use of a dangerous weapon in an assault case, and the recovered weapon and victim's own pleadings indicate use of a non-dangerous weapon (such as a wooden stick), the conviction for causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon (Section 326 IPC) should be converted to voluntarily causing grievous hurt (Section 325 IPC). Once so converted, the court may grant permission to compound the offence under Section 325 IPC when the victim and accused have amicably settled, subject to strict compliance with Section 320 CrPC which governs the entire field of compounding of offences. The court's discretionary powers under Article 142 cannot be exercised to circumvent or override the statutory restrictions prescribed in Section 320 CrPC.
On this section: Compounding of offences - comprehensive provisions governing which offences are compoundable, by whom, and with what conditions
-
K. Kandasamy vs K. P. M. V. P. Chandrasekaran
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where parties to a criminal dispute voluntarily settle their differences and file a joint application under Section 320(5) Cr.P.C. with supporting affidavits clearly setting forth the terms of settlement, the Court is empowered to grant permission to compound the offence. Upon such compounding, the accused party shall be acquitted of the charges. The court exercises discretion in granting such permission based on the facts and circumstances of each case.
On this section: Provides legal basis for permitting compounding of offences where parties have settled and filed joint application; court granted permission under this section
-
Madhav Saran Agarwal vs Msx Mall Pvt. LTD
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 138/141 proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a corporate debtor are covered by the moratorium provision in Section 14(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as such proceedings relate to transactions evidencing debt of the corporate debtor and result in depletion of its assets through compensation orders, thereby directly impacting the object of the moratorium which is to preserve the corporate debtor's assets during the insolvency resolution process so it can continue as a going concern and be rehabilitated. However, the moratorium applies only to the corporate debtor and not to natural persons (Directors/officers) in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the corporate debtor, who remain liable to prosecution under Section 138/141 as the corporate debtor is a necessary party to such proceedings.
On this section: Cited to show that Section 147 of NI Act overrides this section for compounding of Section 138 offences
-
Naresh Kumar Gupta vs Sood Resins and Polymers
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 138/141 proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a corporate debtor are covered by the moratorium provision in Section 14(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as such proceedings are 'proceedings' within the meaning of that section. The moratorium applies only to the corporate debtor and not to natural persons (Directors and officers) who can continue to be prosecuted under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The rules of statutory construction (noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis) cannot be applied to restrict the meaning of 'proceedings' in Section 14(1)(a) when the expression is designedly wide and the object of the statute is clear - which is to preserve the corporate debtor's assets during the insolvency resolution process.
On this section: Cited to show that Section 147 of NI Act overrides Section 320(9) CrPC
-
Pravat Chandra Mohanty vs The State of Odisha
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When police officers abuse their position of authority and commit custodial violence resulting in death, such offense is a matter of grave public concern affecting entire society and cannot be compounded merely on agreement of parties. The Court must exercise discretion based on public interest and nature of offense. Even when refusing to compound non-compoundable offense, Court can consider settlement between parties for purpose of reducing sentence. Wooden lathi and batten are weapons capable of causing death depending on manner of use. Custodial violence by police requires proportionately stringent punishment to have effective deterrent effect and instill confidence in criminal justice system.
On this section: Compounding of offenses. Section 320(2) provides for compounding with Court permission. Section 320(5) provides that when accused has been convicted and appeal is pending, no composition allowed without leave of Court. Court held that composition not permissible merely on agreement of parties but requires Court discretion based on public interest.
-
Amit Kesar vs Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The High Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, can quash criminal proceedings or FIR based on a compromise reached between the accused and the complainant, particularly in cases involving private disputes between family members. Section 320 CrPC does not limit or affect these powers. When parties have genuinely resolved their differences and are living peacefully together, continuing the criminal prosecution would serve no fruitful purpose and would result in a wasteful mock trial, contrary to the interests of justice.
On this section: Compounding of offences; the court clarified that Section 320 does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482
-
Karam Singh vs State Of Punjab
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal cases involving non-compoundable offences such as Section 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder), while the conviction cannot be set aside merely on the basis of compromise between parties, the compromise is a relevant and significant circumstance that the court must consider when determining the quantum of sentence. When parties who are residents of the same village and apparently related have settled their disputes amicably after a prolonged period, the court should take a lenient view on sentencing to enable the parties to live cordially together, provided the conviction is maintained to uphold the rule of law. Additionally, acquittals recorded by the trial court should not be reversed on appeal at a belated stage when the evidence was insufficient at trial and the parties have subsequently reconciled.
On this section: Compounding of Offences - Referenced to establish that Section 307 IPC offences are non-compoundable
-
Bir Singh vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving post-conviction compromise between the accused and the victim in matters relating to compoundable or semi-compoundable offences (such as causing hurt or grievous hurt), where the victim has no grievance and the parties have settled amicably, the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to set aside the conviction and sentence, notwithstanding the statutory bar on compounding non-compoundable offences under Section 320 CrPC. This exercise of inherent jurisdiction is justified on the grounds that: (1) continuation of criminal proceedings would violate the constitutional guarantee of liberty under Article 21; (2) the pragmatic approach recognizes that when parties have reconciled, continuing prosecution serves no fruitful purpose; (3) the court should prioritize restoration of harmony and reconciliation over rigid adherence to statutory bars; and (4) extensive Supreme Court precedent supports this approach. However, this power must be exercised cautiously and only in cases where the facts and circumstances justify such intervention, and it may not apply to the most serious offences (such as murder).
On this section: Compounding of offences; Section 320(2) specifies which offences are compoundable; Section 320(8) provides that compounding shall have the effect of acquittal
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is noncompoundable. 16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High …
-
… The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab , (2012) 10 SCC 303, while explaining that the High Court has inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with no statutory limitation, including Section 320 Cr.P.C., has held that these powers are to be exercised, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court and these powers can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings or complaint or FIR inappropriate cases where offender and victim have settled  10 SCC 705 observed that simply because an offence is not compoundable under section 320 Code of Criminal Procedure is by itself no reason for the High Court to refuse exercise of its power under section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. 13. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh V State of Punjab and Others, (2012)10SC C 303 laid down following principles:- 57. The position that emerges from the …
Questions about Section 320
What have the courts held on Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (27 Mar 2014) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.320 compounding is not interchangeable with s.482 quashing. Offences listed as compoundable are personal; a true s.307 IPC is against society and is not to be compounded. High Courts may still quash an over-added 307 on injury/weapon/timing of settlement (Narinder Singh). Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 13 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2005 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 320 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 320, section 320 CRPC, section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. People searching for it also type crpc 320 in bnss and crpc 320 1 in hindi. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (27 Mar 2014).
What should I read with Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 401 (High Court's Powers of revisions), Indian Penal Code 500 (Punishment for defamation), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 359 (Compounding of offences), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 320, 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
- 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
- 145. Procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely to causebreach of peace735 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.