Home / Current Issue / Paper 1716466
Misuse Of Criminal Law in India: A Comprehensive Study on IPC and BNS
Subject area: Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities · Area of research: Criminal Law Misuse in India
DOI: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I10-1716466
Abstract
The misuse of criminal law in India stands as one of the most pressing challenges confronting the nation’s legal order, manifesting as the deliberate weaponisation of penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and its successor, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), to advance personal vendettas, political agendas, and economic coercion rather than to vindicate genuine public wrongs. This paper undertakes a comprehensive doctrinal analysis of the principal forms of criminal law misuse, examining key provisions such as Sections 420, 498A, 153A, and 124A of the IPC alongside their BNS counterparts, with reference to landmark judicial decisions including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India, and Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP. The study traces the colonial origins of over-criminalisation through Lord Macaulay’s Indian Penal Code, evaluates the BNS reforms and their structural limitations, and assesses the socio-economic, constitutional, and institutional consequences of systemic misuse. The research identifies critical gaps in verification mechanisms, forensic infrastructure, and police accountability, and advances targeted recommendations for legislative, judicial, and administrative reform. The paper concludes that while the BNS offers meaningful procedural improvements, genuine transformation requires coordinated effort across legislative drafting, police culture, and judicial oversight to preserve the criminal justice system’s foundational legitimacy.
Keywords
Misuse of Criminal Law; Indian Penal Code; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; Over-Criminalisation; Section 498A; Sedition; False FIRs; Judicial Safeguards; Police Reforms; Constitutional Rights.
How to cite this paper
@article{1716466,
author = {Anushree, Dr. Taru Mishra},
title = {Misuse Of Criminal Law in India: A Comprehensive Study on IPC and BNS},
journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
year = {2026},
volume = {9},
number = {10},
pages = {2150-2157},
issn = {2456-8880},
url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1716466.pdf},
abstract = {The misuse of criminal law in India stands as one of the most pressing challenges confronting the nation’s legal order, manifesting as the deliberate weaponisation of penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and its successor, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), to advance personal vendettas, political agendas, and economic coercion rather than to vindicate genuine public wrongs. This paper undertakes a comprehensive doctrinal analysis of the principal forms of criminal law misuse, examining key provisions such as Sections 420, 498A, 153A, and 124A of the IPC alongside their BNS counterparts, with reference to landmark judicial decisions including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India, and Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP. The study traces the colonial origins of over-criminalisation through Lord Macaulay’s Indian Penal Code, evaluates the BNS reforms and their structural limitations, and assesses the socio-economic, constitutional, and institutional consequences of systemic misuse. The research identifies critical gaps in verification mechanisms, forensic infrastructure, and police accountability, and advances targeted recommendations for legislative, judicial, and administrative reform. The paper concludes that while the BNS offers meaningful procedural improvements, genuine transformation requires coordinated effort across legislative drafting, police culture, and judicial oversight to preserve the criminal justice system’s foundational legitimacy.},
keywords = {Misuse of Criminal Law; Indian Penal Code; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; Over-Criminalisation; Section 498A; Sedition; False FIRs; Judicial Safeguards; Police Reforms; Constitutional Rights.},
month = {April},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I10-1716466}
}