Which Offences Can Be Compounded Under the BNS?

Compounding is the formal settlement of a criminal case between the accused and the victim, and when a court records it the accused is acquitted. The list of compoundable offences BNS prosecutions have to be checked against is not in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at all. It sits in Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which replaced Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and it takes the form of two tables: one of offences the victim may compound on their own, and one of offences that can be compounded only with the permission of the court. Anything outside both tables cannot be compounded at all.

That last sentence is where most settlements come unstuck. Parties reach an agreement, sign a memorandum, file affidavits of no objection, and then discover that the offence charged is not on either list. The case does not end. What follows is a look at both tables, at what falls outside them, and at what the law offers when the offence is non-compoundable but the dispute is genuinely over.

What compounding is, and what it is not

Compounding is a statutory settlement. The victim, or the person the statute names, agrees to compose the offence, and Section 359(8) gives that composition "the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded". It is not the same as the complainant simply refusing to support the prosecution, and it is not the same as a withdrawal by the prosecutor under Section 360 of the Sanhita, which is a state decision requiring the court's consent. It is also different from quashing, which is a High Court power, and from plea bargaining, which is a separate chapter of the Sanhita.

Key takeaway. A recorded composition produces an acquittal, not a discharge or a withdrawal. That matters for the accused later, whenever a criminal record has to be disclosed, and it means the matter cannot simply be revived if the settlement money is not paid. Build the payment into the settlement before the composition is recorded, not after.

Where the compoundable offences BNS list actually lives

Section 359(1) sets out offences that "may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table" with no court permission required. Section 359(2) sets out offences that may be compounded only "with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending". Both tables identify the offence by its section in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and name the person entitled to compound, which is almost always the victim rather than a relative or the informant.

Four sub-sections of Section 359 carry the whole scheme, and each does a different job.

Offences compoundable without the court's permission

A representative selection from the Section 359(1) table follows. The full table in the Sanhita is longer.

Offences compoundable only with the court's permission

The Section 359(2) table is short enough to set out in full.

What is not compoundable

Section 359(9) closes the door: "No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section." So murder under Section 103, rape under Section 64, dowry death under Section 80, cruelty by a husband or his relative under Section 85, kidnapping under Section 137, robbery under Section 309, dacoity under Section 310 and voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons under Section 118 are all outside the scheme, along with the great majority of offences under special statutes unless that statute makes its own provision.

Common mistake. Treating an affidavit of no objection from the complainant as the end of a non-compoundable case. It is not. In a case under Section 85 of the Sanhita, a settlement deed and a supportive affidavit do not, by themselves, terminate the prosecution. Without a compounding provision or a quashing order, the trial continues, and the complainant can be treated as a hostile witness rather than as someone who has ended the case.

Four routes out of a criminal case, compared

When the offence is not compoundable but the dispute is over

This is where the High Court's inherent power comes in. Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which carries forward Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, preserves the High Court's power to prevent abuse of process and to secure the ends of justice.

In Ramgopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, decided by the Supreme Court on 29 September 2021, the Court held that this power can be exercised to quash non-compoundable offences where the proceedings are overwhelmingly and predominantly of a civil character, typically disputes arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial relationships or family matters, and where the parties have genuinely resolved the entire dispute. The judgment reaffirmed Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which drew the distinction between the quashing power and the power to compound, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, which cautioned that the concession is not available for heinous offences. Murder, rape and dacoity remain outside it.

The sub-sections that trip people up

Section 359 carries seven operative rules beyond the two tables, and each of them has ended a settlement at some point.

Sub-section (3) extends compounding to the abetment of a compoundable offence and to an attempt where the attempt is itself an offence. Sub-section (4) deals with capacity: where the person competent to compound is a child or of unsound mind, a person competent to contract on their behalf may compound with the court's permission, and where that person has died, the legal representative may compound with the court's consent. Note the change of language from the old Code, which spoke of a person under eighteen or an idiot or a lunatic.

Sub-section (5) says that once the accused has been committed for trial, or convicted with an appeal pending, no composition is allowed without the leave of the committal court or the appellate court. Sub-section (6) allows a High Court or a Court of Session exercising revisional powers under Section 442 to permit a composition. Sub-section (7) is a hard bar: no offence is compoundable if the accused is liable, by reason of a previous conviction, to enhanced punishment or to a punishment of a different kind.

Deadline warning. The stage of the case changes who has to say yes. Before committal, the trial court deals with it. After committal or after conviction with an appeal pending, Section 359(5) requires the leave of that higher court. Settlements negotiated on the assumption that the magistrate can still record the composition often have to be re-filed, and the delay is rarely recoverable.

Which court has to say yes depends entirely on the stage the case has reached.

Which law applies, the BNS or the IPC

The Sanhitas came into force on 1 July 2024, and the transitional provisions matter. Section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 repeals the Indian Penal Code but saves liability already incurred, so an offence committed before that date is still an offence under the Penal Code. Section 531(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides that any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending immediately before commencement continues under the old Code as if the Sanhita had not come into force.

In practice that means an older matter is compounded under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by reference to Penal Code sections, and a newer matter under Section 359 of the Sanhita by reference to Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections. Filing the wrong application in a busy magistrate's court usually costs a hearing or two.

Cheque bounce is compounded under a different provision

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is not on either table in Section 359, because Section 147 of that Act makes its own provision: notwithstanding anything in the Code of Criminal Procedure, every offence punishable under the Act is compoundable. Compounding a cheque case therefore runs on the Negotiable Instruments Act, not on the Sanhita. On costs, the graded scale suggested in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. has since been treated by the Supreme Court as guidance rather than a binding rule, so a court is not obliged to apply the old percentages mechanically.

How an offence is compounded, step by step

1. Identify the exact offence and sub-section charged, from the charge sheet or the order framing charge, not from the FIR heading.
2. Check it against the Section 359(1) and Section 359(2) tables, and confirm whether the case is governed by the Sanhita or by the old Code under Section 531(2)(a).
3. Confirm that the person compounding is the person named in the third column, and that Section 359(7) does not bar composition because of a previous conviction.
4. Reduce the settlement to writing, with the consideration paid or secured before the composition is recorded.
5. File a joint application for composition in the court seized of the matter, or seek leave of the committal or appellate court where Section 359(5) applies.
6. Have the complainant identified and examined by the court so the voluntariness of the composition is on record.
7. Obtain the order recording the composition and the consequent acquittal under Section 359(8), and keep a certified copy.
8. Where the offence is not compoundable, move the High Court under Section 528 for quashing on the strength of the settlement instead.

Indicative cost and time

These are ranges and not quotations. An uncontested compounding application before a magistrate is usually inexpensive, with professional fees often in the low tens of thousands of rupees plus incidentals, and can be disposed of within a few hearings once both parties appear, which in practice tends to mean some weeks rather than days. A quashing petition before a High Court costs materially more and commonly takes several months from filing to disposal, longer if the matter is contested by the state or if the parties have to be produced for identification. Court fees, travel and the cost of producing the complainant all add up, and no timeline can be promised.

A note from practice

The most common failure we see is sequencing. Parties settle, the money is promised in instalments, the composition is recorded, and then the instalments stop. Once an acquittal is entered under Section 359(8), the criminal case is over, and the aggrieved party is left with a civil recovery action that takes years. The discipline is simple: either the consideration is paid in full before the composition is recorded, or the settlement is structured so that the criminal proceeding is disposed of only after the last payment clears. The second common failure is checking the wrong list, because an offence that was compoundable under a familiar Penal Code number may sit under a different Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita number, or in the other table. Read the section, not the memory of it.

Related reading: quashing an FIR under Section 482 CrPC, now Section 528 BNSS, compounding compared with quashing in a cheque bounce case, and settlement and compounding in cheque bounce matters. You can also read about our criminal defence and prosecution practice.

Related guides and where to get help

If this is a live problem rather than background reading, our criminal defence practice handles these matters from Bengaluru, including for clients who cannot attend court in person. These guides go deeper on the neighbouring questions:

• Discharge and Acquittal Are Not the Same: Why the Difference Matters
• Served a Section 35 BNSS Police Notice? What It Means
• Victim Compensation Scheme in India: How to Claim

Frequently Asked Questions

This article is for general information and is not legal advice. Whether a particular case can be settled depends on the sections actually charged and on the stage of the proceedings.