IMPORTANT POINT
Pending applications under the repealed Code of Criminal Procedure are governed by the old law if filed before the new law's enactment, as per saving provisions.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, incarcerated on having been convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the trial Court as well as Sessions Court, had come up before this Court by filing the present revision petition on 15-Dec-2023 under Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC]. However, since the petitioner did not assail the judgment passed by the Sessions Court within the statutory limitation of ninety days, the petitioner had also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 38 days. Technically speaking, unless the delay was condoned, no criminal revision petition was pending before this Court. Thus, the primary matter before this Court was adjudicating the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

2. The complainant has been arraigned as the first respondent and the State of Punjab as the second. The first respondent, the aggrieved party, did not file any reply to the delay application CRM-53576-2023. As per the application, the reasons for the delay were the petitioner’s confinement in jail, which resulted in exceeding the limitation for challenging the judgment of Sessions Court by 38 days. These are sufficient grounds to condone the delay in filing the revision petition and extend the time to file the appeal. Given the above, the application for delay, CRM-53576-2023, is allowed, the delay is condoned, and the time to file the revision petition is extended till the date of filing.

3. On 19.12.2023, when the matter was listed for the first time, it was adjourned on the petitioner’s request to 11.01.2024, on which date notices were issued in both applications and the main revision petition returnable for 26.02.2024. When the matter was taken up on 16.04.2024, respondent No.1- complainant had put in an appearance through his counsel, and on that date, counsel for the petitioner sought time to ascertain the possibility of payment of compensation amount to the complainant and the matter was adjourned for today, i.e., 02-Jul-2024. However, in the meantime, CrPC stood repealed w.e.f. 01-Jul-2024.

4. The Indian Parliament enacted a new criminal procedure code, “The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023”, to replace the existing Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Vide notification number S.O. 850(E), dated 23rd February 2024, the Central Government appointed the first day of July 2024 as the date on which the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, except the provision of sub-section (2) of section 106, shall come into force. Resultantly, at 00:00:00 hours of 01-Jul-2024, [12 am (midnight)], the ‘Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973’ stood repealed, and ‘The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’, came into force.

5. Since there was a delay in filing the revision petition, technically speaking, no criminal revision petition was pending before this Court, and it was the delay application filed under Section 5 of the limitation Act, 1963, that was pending before this Court and not the primary matter, i.e., the Criminal Revision petition.

6. The proposition of law that sprouts is that the time-barred petitions filed up to 30- Jun-2024 under CrPC, accompanied with applications under S. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, pending as of 01-Jul-2024, if the delay is condoned, would be governed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?

7. Section 531 of the The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, reads as follows,

Section 531.

(1) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is hereby repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding such repeal—

(a) if, immediately before the date on which this Sanhita comes into force, there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as in force imm