Chapter I
Section 5 CrPC: Saving
New Law Update (2024)
Section 2 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Repeal / Savings
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
Nothing contained in this Code shall, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, affect any special or local law for the time being in force, or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed, by any other law for the time being in force.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Landmark Judgements
K. Satwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1960):
The Supreme Court clarified that where a special or local law does not prescribe a specific procedure or confer certain powers, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply, provided they are not inconsistent with the special law. This highlights the supplementary role of the CrPC.
M.P. Special Police Establishment v. State of M.P. (2004):
The Supreme Court reiterated that if a special Act contains specific provisions that are inconsistent with or repugnant to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, then the provisions of the special Act would prevail, thereby affirming the saving principle enshrined in Section 5.
Directorate of Enforcement v. Deepak Mahajan (1994):
This case extensively discussed the applicability of CrPC provisions to special enactments. It held that where a special law provides a complete procedure, it shall govern; however, if silent on certain procedural aspects, CrPC provisions can be invoked, so long as they do not contradict the special law.