BLS LLB 5 Years Sem 9 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita BNSS Solved Question Papers with Answers 2024 to 2026 - Mumbai University | munotes

This is the newest subject on the BLS LLB course, and the folder is small for a reason: the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure on 1 July 2024, so the first paper under this name was set in December 2024 and only three exist. All three run to the same shape, 60 marks in two hours, in sections of 12, 12, 12 and 24. That means every semester-end paper this subject has ever produced is solved here, which is not true of any other subject on the site.

The name on the folder is misleading in one way worth knowing before you plan your revision. The printed header names three statutes, not one: the Sanhita, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Across the three papers, twelve of the sixty-six questions and seventy-five of the three hundred and thirty-six marks come from the two child statutes, and they are never blended into the procedure questions. They sit in their own slots: a short note, a situational problem, and one of the four long answers. A candidate who prepares only the Sanhita has left roughly a fifth of the paper unread, and it is the fifth that is easiest to learn, because the Juvenile Justice questions keep returning to the same handful of provisions, the Board, the Committee, the definition of a heinous offence and the preliminary assessment for trying a sixteen year old as an adult.

The most useful single fact in this folder is that all three papers set an FIR problem in the situational section, and all three are the same problem. Jiten is turned away at Dadar police station because the offence happened in Nashik. Suryakant wants to register at Kamalnagar when the offence was in Zebranagar. A is told his stolen mobile phone is a minor issue. Every one of them is answered the same way: registration is mandatory where the information discloses a cognizable offence, which is Lalita Kumari, the words irrespective of the area where the offence is committed in Section 173(1) are what make the Zero FIR a right rather than a courtesy, and the remedies on refusal are the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4), the Magistrate under Section 175(3) on an application supported by an affidavit, and a private complaint under Section 223. Prepare that one answer properly and you have six marks in the bag in any sitting of this paper.

Arrest is the largest topic in the subject and it is not close. Five questions across the three papers, worth forty-four marks, ask about the procedure of arrest, when the police may arrest without a warrant, the arrest of women and of a proclaimed offender, or the rights of an arrested person. Two of them are the twelve mark long answer. The whole of it comes out of a short run of sections, 35, 43 and 46 to 58, together with Articles 20(3), 21 and 22, and four judgments that are worth knowing by name and holding: Joginder Kumar, D. K. Basu, Arnesh Kumar and Prem Shankar Shukla.

The short answer section is more finite than it looks. Fifteen of the thirty two mark questions in this folder are straight definitions out of Section 2(1) of the Sanhita, and a sixteenth is the definition of juvenile in Section 2(35) of the Juvenile Justice Act. Section 2(1) runs from clause (a) to clause (z) in a single alphabetical list, twenty-six clauses, and it now defines things the old Code never did, including bail, bail bond, bond and audio-video electronic means. Reading that one section carefully is the best return on an hour available anywhere in this subject.

Notice where the examiners are choosing to ask. Almost every question in these papers sits on a point where the Sanhita departs from the Code it replaced: the Zero FIR, the sixty day limit for a discharge application, the abolition of the separate class of Metropolitan Magistrates, trial in absentia of a proclaimed offender, the fourteen day statement and photograph of seized property, the time limits running through the sessions trial, and the victim compensation scheme. That is not a coincidence, and it tells you what to do with an older CrPC textbook: use it for the structure and check every section number and every time limit against the new Sanhita before you write it down.

One oddity of the folder is worth explaining, because it will confuse you when you open the third file. The 2025-26 ATKT paper, sat in April 2026, still carries the old printed header, Paper Subject Code 075712, Criminal Procedure Code, Juvenile Justice Act 2000 and Probation of Offenders Act, with only a handwritten margin note naming the BNSS. The paper is consistent with that header rather than with the new one: it asks what remedies are available under CrPC, sets an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, and is the only one of the three with no POCSO question at all. Its Section 2 also differs, asking for short notes on any four of four at 3 marks each where the regular papers ask for any two of four at 6. Answer such a paper on the current law and name the old provision the question cites, which is what the answers here do.

These are model answers prepared by munotes. They are a study aid and not official University answer keys, which the University of Mumbai does not publish.