The legal landscape in India has transformed significantly with the BNSS. Specifically, criminal defense practitioners now navigate a complex new framework. The Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail BNSS 2025 interpretations provide clarity. However, the transition from the CrPC to BNSS has sparked debates on procedure and jurisdiction.
This post analyzes critical guidelines governing transit remand and territorial jurisdiction. We will explore the 2025 rulings shaping criminal defense today. Furthermore, we offer actionable strategies for lawyers practicing under the BNSS.
Introduction: The Paradigm Shift in Criminal Procedure
The BNSS replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) on July 1, 2024. Consequently, this shift introduced several procedural changes. For example, Section 482 BNSS now governs anticipatory bail, replacing Section 438 CrPC.
Most importantly, the new code has deleted specific “guiding factors” previously mandatory for courts. Therefore, judges now enjoy wider discretionary powers when granting bail [1]. However, the absence of specific factors has created uncertainty regarding transit remand and jurisdiction.
In 2025, various High Courts and the Supreme Court addressed these gaps. For instance, the Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail BNSS 2025 jurisprudence emphasizes individual liberty. Specifically, recent rulings have clarified the powers of Magistrates during inter-state arrests [2].
Thus, understanding these new guidelines is essential for effective legal practice. Lawyers must adapt their strategies to align with the BNSS provisions.
Understanding ‘Transit Remand’ Under the New BNSS Framework
Transit remand is a critical procedural concept in inter-state arrests. It allows police to detain an accused temporarily while transporting them to the jurisdictional court. Under the BNSS, Section 187 governs these remand procedures. This provision ensures that police comply with legal safeguards during transit.
Validity and Time Limits
The law mandates strict time limits for transit remand. Any person arrested without a warrant must be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours. This rule applies even when the arrest occurs in a different state [3].
Therefore, the police cannot detain an accused indefinitely without judicial authorization. Furthermore, the Magistrate authorizing the transit remand has limited jurisdiction. They can only authorize custody for the purpose of safe transit. Moreover, they cannot authorize substantive police custody for interrogation.
As a result, this prevents “magistrate shopping” by law enforcement agencies [4].
Rights of the Accused During Transit
The accused retains fundamental rights during the transit period. First, they have the right to consult a legal practitioner. Second, the police must inform them of the grounds of arrest immediately. Additionally, a medical examination is mandatory upon arrest [5].
However, enforcement of these rights can be challenging during inter-state transit. Therefore, defense lawyers must act swiftly to protect their clients. If the police fail to produce the accused within 24 hours, the remand becomes liable to be quashed.
This principle was reaffirmed in the Gautam Navlakha judgment. Consequently, this case remains relevant under BNSS [6].
Impact on Police Procedure
The new guidelines have significantly curtailed arbitrary police practices. Previously, police often obtained transit remand mechanically. Now, Magistrates must apply their judicial mind. They must examine case diary entries before authorizing detention [7].
Consequently, this reduces the risk of illegal detention. Police must now ensure they have sufficient documentation before approaching a Magistrate. Thus, this shift enforces accountability in inter-state investigations.
Jurisdictional Conundrums: Place of Occurrence vs. Place of Arrest
Jurisdictional issues frequently arise when an FIR is registered in one state, but the accused resides in another. The Supreme Court addressed this in the landmark Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) judgment.
Although decided under the CrPC, the principles apply to the Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail BNSS 2025 context [8].
The Principle of Territorial Nexus
The Supreme Court established that courts can grant “transit anticipatory bail.” However, this power is not unlimited. There must be a “territorial nexus” between the accused and the court [9].
For example, a person working in a different state can seek bail there. But they cannot simply travel to a favorable state to file a petition. The nexus can be established through residence, occupation, or business [10].
Therefore, lawyers must prove this connection clearly. Without it, the court will likely reject the application for forum shopping.
BNSS and State Restrictions
The BNSS has also altered the impact of state-specific restrictions. Previously, states like Uttar Pradesh had strict bars on anticipatory bail for serious offenses. However, the Allahabad High Court held in 2025 that the BNSS overrides these state amendments [11].
Thus, the removal of the UP Amendment bar is a significant development. It allows lawyers to argue for bail even in cases punishable by death or life imprisonment. Indeed, this interpretation aligns with the liberal intent of the new legislation.
Practical Implications for Lawyers
Practitioners face unique challenges in these scenarios. If a client fears arrest in another state, time is of the essence. You must file a transit anticipatory bail application in the client’s current location.
Additionally, you must notify the Investigating Officer (IO) and Public Prosecutor (PP). The Supreme Court mandates this notice on the first day of hearing [12]. Failure to do so can result in the bail being set aside.
Key Procedural Mandates Established by the Courts
Recent judgments have established strict procedural mandates for police and courts. These mandates protect the accused’s rights during the critical initial stages of arrest.
Documentation and Case Diary Standards
The most crucial requirement is the maintenance of the Case Diary. Police must present relevant entries to the Magistrate when seeking transit remand. These entries must justify the need for detention [13].
For instance, in the Gautam Navlakha case, the lack of case diary entries led to the quashing of transit remand. This precedent remains vital under BNSS. Therefore, any remand order passed without examining the diary is vulnerable to challenge [14].
Compliance with Section 35 BNSS
Section 35 BNSS mandates that police record reasons for arrest in writing. They must also forward these reasons to the Magistrate. This provision strengthens the safeguards against arbitrary arrests [15].
Consequently, police can no longer make oral justifications for custody. They must document the grounds meticulously. As a result, defense lawyers should scrutinize these records for any omissions or discrepancies.
Time Limits for Hearings
The judiciary has also emphasized the need for speedy hearings. In M/s Netsity Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2025), the Supreme Court criticized mechanical delays [16].
The Court introduced the concept of “deemed court custody.” Once an accused appears before a court for a bail plea, they are deemed to be in court custody. As a result, they cannot be remanded to police custody without a specific order [17].
Therefore, lawyers must ensure their clients appear before the court formally. This triggers the protective “deemed custody” status immediately.
Strategic Implications for Criminal Defense Practitioners
The evolving legal landscape requires updated strategies. Criminal defense lawyers must modify their approach to anticipatory bail under the BNSS.
Drafting Effective Petitions
Drafting under BNSS requires a focus on discretion rather than negative factors. Since the “guiding factors” are deleted, you should frame arguments around the conditions Section 482 BNSS allows courts to impose [18].
For example, emphasize your client’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Highlight their fixed residence and ties to the community. These factors help the court exercise its discretion in your favor.
Additionally, if arguing in a state with previous restrictions, cite the Allahabad High Court ruling. Argue that the BNSS has removed the statutory bar on anticipatory bail [19].
Checklist for Inter-State Arrests
When handling potential inter-state arrests, follow this checklist:
- Verify Nexus: Confirm the client’s residential or professional connection to the jurisdiction.
- File Early: Submit the transit anticipatory bail petition immediately.
- Serve Notice: Ensure the IO and PP receive notice before the first hearing.
- Document Grounds: Collect medical records or evidence of threat if applicable.
- Prepare for Transit: Plan the client’s production before the jurisdictional court within the allowed time.
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
Avoid these common errors to ensure success:
- Forum Shopping: Do not file in courts with no territorial nexus. This will lead to immediate dismissal.
- Suppressing Facts: Never hide previous rejections of bail. Suppression of facts is grounds for cancellation.
- Ignoring BNSS Provisions: Do not cite CrPC sections without cross-referencing BNSS equivalents. Use BNSS citations for accuracy.
By avoiding these mistakes, you build a stronger case for your client.
Conclusion: Adapting Practice to the New Legal Reality
The Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail BNSS 2025 guidelines represent a shift towards protecting individual liberty. The deletion of restrictive factors and the clarification of transit bail rights are positive steps. However, the onus is on practitioners to leverage these changes effectively.
We must stay updated on the evolving interpretations of the BNSS. The balance between state efficacy and personal liberty is delicate. Yet, the new framework offers robust tools for defense lawyers.
Ultimately, mastering these new rules is essential for compliance and success. The law favors the prepared mind. Therefore, integrate these strategies into your practice to navigate the post-CrPC era with confidence.
Streamline your criminal law practice with LawSathi. Automate case deadline tracking for BNSS compliance and manage jurisdictional documents effortlessly in 2026. Start your free trial today.
