The Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, and What Replaced Them

Facts. Residents of a ward in Ratlam complained to a magistrate of open drains and of effluent from an alcohol plant flowing through their street, and the magistrate ordered the municipality to construct drains within six months. The municipality pleaded want of funds. Held. The order was upheld; a statutory body cannot plead financial inability against a mandatory public duty, and the abatement power is a tool of social justice for ordinary people, to be wielded against the polluter. Why it matters here. It is the leading decision under the old section 133, and it must now be read as a decision on section 152 of the Sanhita of 2023.

The concordance

The two chapters were carried into the new Sanhitas with the same content and different numbers. These are the ones a student needs.

What actually changed

The chapter number. Chapter XIV of the Penal Code became Chapter XV of the Sanhita.

Some fines were raised. Several of the negligent-conduct offences that carried a fine of one thousand rupees in the Penal Code now carry five thousand rupees. The offence of making the atmosphere noxious still carries a fine of one thousand rupees and no imprisonment, which is the single most criticised provision in this part of the law.

Community service was added as a punishment for certain minor offences, though not for the environmental ones in this chapter.

Audio-video conferencing was permitted for the appearance of a person against whom a nuisance order is made.

What did not change. The definition of a public nuisance, the ingredients of every offence in the table, the structure of the abatement procedure, and the penalties for the two water and air offences. A student who says the new Sanhitas transformed environmental criminal law is wrong.

Worked example

A magistrate in 2019 made an order under section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requiring a stone crusher to stop operating within a village. The order is challenged in 2026 and the operator's counsel says the section no longer exists.

Is he right that it no longer exists? Yes, as a section of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was repealed on 1 July 2024.

Does the order fall? No. Section 531 of the Sanhita of 2023 contains a saving: notwithstanding the repeal, anything done or any action taken under the repealed Code is deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provision of the Sanhita.

How should the case now be argued? By reference to section 152 of the Sanhita, which reproduces the old section 133, and by citing Ratlam and the older authorities as decisions on the corresponding provision.

What must a student not do? Cite section 133 as live law, and equally must not say that the old cases are no longer good law. Both errors are common and both are avoidable with the table above.

What it does NOT mean

It does not mean the criminal law is an effective environmental remedy. It is not, and the reasons are in the next two chapters: the fines are trivial, the offences require proof beyond reasonable doubt, and the abatement power depends on an executive magistrate choosing to act.

It does not mean the special statutes replaced the general criminal law. Until 31 March 2024 section 24(2) of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 provided that where an act or omission constituted an offence punishable under that Act and also under any other Act, the offender was to be punished under the other Act and not under the Act of 1986. From 1 April 2024 contraventions of that Act are penalties rather than offences and the sub-section has been removed, so the general criminal law operates alongside the penalty regime with nothing in the Act of 1986 to displace it.

It does not mean every environmental offence is in Chapter XV. The most important environmental offences are in the special statutes, and the Sanhita's chapter is a residual and general provision.

Quick revision

• Both Codes repealed on 1 July 2024, by section 358 of the Nyaya Sanhita and section 531 of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
• Offences: Chapter XIV of the Penal Code became Chapter XV of the Sanhita, sections 270 to 297.
• Machinery: sections 133 to 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure became sections 152 to 163 of the Sanhita.
• Public nuisance defined: section 268 became section 270. Fouling water: 277 became 279. Noxious atmosphere: 278 became 280.
• Conditional order: section 133 became section 152. Urgent cases: section 144 became section 163.
• The content is substantially unchanged; some fines were raised and audio-video appearance was permitted.

Test yourself

1. Give the new numbers for the offence of fouling the water of a public spring, the offence of making the atmosphere noxious, and the magistrate's conditional order. Section 279 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 for fouling water, formerly section 277 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 280 of the same Sanhita for making the atmosphere noxious, formerly section 278. And section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for the conditional order for the removal of a nuisance, formerly section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

2. Is Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand still good law? Yes. It was decided under section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, which has been reproduced without material change as section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, and the repealing section of the new Sanhita contains a saving for things done under the old Code. The decision should now be cited as authority on section 152.

3. A discharge is an offence both under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. Under which is the offender punished? Before 1 April 2024, under the other Act, by force of section 24(2) of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, which provided that where an act or omission constituted an offence punishable under that Act and also under any other Act, the offender was to be punished under the other Act and not under the Act of 1986. Since that date the contravention is a penalty under the Act of 1986, section 24 has been substituted without its old sub-section (2), and a prosecution under the general criminal law stands on its own, alongside any penalty.