✓ Substantially Identical

Law Transition Comparison: Section 22 BSA vs Section 24 IEA

Side-by-side analysis of statutory changes, penal differences, bailable classification, trial courts, and precedents following India's July 2024 criminal law transition.

AI Legal Analysis & Key Differences

No material statutory changes have been made to the core text of this provision during the transition. The wording, elements, and thresholds remain substantially identical. However, practitioners must adapt to the new section numbering and procedural alignment under the 2023 Sanhitas.

Transition Checklist for Legal Practitioners

✓

Verify Date of Offense (Crucial for Application)

If the alleged offense occurred before July 1, 2024, substantive charges must be filed under the old act (IEA). For offenses on or after July 1, 2024, use the new Sanhita (BSA).

✓

Nomenclature Audit in Pleadings

Ensure all draft petitions, FIRs, charge sheets, and bail applications refer to Section 22 of the BSA instead of the old Section 24 of the IEA.

✓

Confirm Savings Clause Compliance

Apply the savings clause (Section 531 BNSS or Section 358 BNS) to confirm that any trials, appeals, or investigations pending as of July 1, 2024 continue under the old code (IEA) as if the new Sanhitas had not been enacted.

✓

Review Updated Bail and Trial Jurisdiction

Double-check the schedule in BNSS or CrPC to verify if the trial court jurisdiction (e.g. Session Court vs Magistrate) or the bailable status has been altered for Section 22.

Act Source (Active Site)

Section 22

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam

Official Statutory Text

proceeding.—A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him: Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant: Provided further that if such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him.

Procedural Profile

Offence Category	N/A / Procedural
Bail Eligibility	Procedural
Arrest Classification	Procedural
Trial Court	Procedural
Max Punishment	Procedural

Act Source (Compared)

Section 24

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Official Statutory Text

A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise1, having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds, which would appear to him reasonable, for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.

Procedural Profile

Offence Category	N/A / Procedural
Bail Eligibility	Procedural
Arrest Classification	Procedural
Trial Court	Procedural
Max Punishment	Procedural

Explore Section 22 Details Explore Section 24 Details