A compoundable offence is one that the law allows the victim to settle with the accused, so that the criminal case ends. The list is fixed by Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (formerly Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). It has two tables: offences that the person named in the table may compound on his own, and offences that may be compounded only “with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending”. When an offence is compounded, the law treats it as “an acquittal of the accused” (Section 359(8) BNSS).
A non-compoundable offence is every offence that is not in those two tables, because “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section” (Section 359(9) BNSS), unless another Act makes its own offences compoundable, as Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does for cheque bounce. Murder, rape, dacoity, kidnapping, dowry death and cruelty to a married woman are examples. A settlement does not end such a case by itself; the routes that exist are quashing by the High Court under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC), plea bargaining for some offences, and withdrawal from prosecution by the Public Prosecutor with the court’s consent.
Compoundable and non-compoundable offences at a glance
- The law: Section 359 BNSS (formerly Section 320 CrPC), in force since 1 July 2024. The offences are listed by their sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
- Without the court’s permission (Table 1, Section 359(1)): 37 entries, such as voluntarily causing hurt (Section 115(2) BNS, formerly 323 IPC), theft (303(2), formerly 379), simple cheating (318(2), formerly 417), criminal trespass (329(3), formerly 447), criminal intimidation (351(2) and (3), formerly 506) and defamation (356(2), formerly 500).
- With the court’s permission (Table 2, Section 359(2)): 13 entries, such as grievous hurt (117(2), formerly 325), bigamy (82(1), formerly 494), criminal breach of trust (316(2), formerly 406) and cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property (318(4), formerly 420).
- Who compounds: the person named in the third column of the table, usually the person hurt, cheated or whose property was taken. For a child or a person of unsound mind, “any person competent to contract on his behalf” with the court’s permission; for a person who has died, the legal representative with the court’s consent (Section 359(4)).
- Effect: composition “shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded” (Section 359(8)).
- Everything else is non-compoundable: “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section” (Section 359(9)).
- Settling a non-compoundable case: a compromise alone does not end it; the High Court may quash it under Section 528 BNSS (formerly 482 CrPC), but not for heinous offences such as murder, rape or dacoity (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2014). Plea bargaining and withdrawal by the prosecutor are separate routes.
- Cheque bounce: “every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable” (Section 147, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881); the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines on costs for late compounding, which courts apply.
Reviewed and updated by Century Law Firm, Delhi – October 2026. Statutory references are to the Acts as in force on that date. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are quoted from India Code (as on 6 October 2025, still the current version on 23 October 2026); the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 from their India Code English and official Hindi texts (which carry no ‘as on’ date); the old IPC and CrPC section numbers from the firm’s Gazette-checked comparison data; and the judgments from the Supreme Court’s own copies.
What is a compoundable offence?
To “compound” an offence is to settle it: the person whom the law treats as wronged by the offence agrees to end the matter with the accused, and the court gives effect to that settlement. The BNSS does not define the word; it simply lists, in the two tables of Section 359, the offences that “may be compounded” and names, against each one, the person who may compound it. That person is usually the victim: the person hurt, the owner of the property stolen, the person cheated or the person defamed.
A compoundable offence is still a crime. It is prosecuted and tried like any other offence, and it may be cognizable or non-cognizable, bailable or non-bailable. What makes it compoundable is only that the case can end by settlement. Theft is an example: under the firm’s classification data taken from the First Schedule of the BNSS, theft under Section 303(2) BNS is, in general, cognizable and non-bailable (the First Schedule treats theft of property worth less than five thousand rupees by a first offender differently), yet it is in the first table of Section 359, so the owner of the stolen property may compound it without the court’s permission.
In the official Hindi texts of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, the word used for “compoundable” is शमनीय. The official Hindi text of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is headed “अपराध का शमनीय होना” (offences to be compoundable). A fuller summary in Hindi is given further below.
The firm’s video on this topic:
What is a non-compoundable offence?
A non-compoundable offence is one that the victim and the accused cannot settle so as to end the case. The BNSS does not list non-compoundable offences; it lists only the compoundable ones and then closes the door on everything else: “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section” (Section 359(9)). So the first question is always whether the offence appears, by its BNS section, in one of the two tables. If it does not, and no other Act makes it compoundable, it is non-compoundable.
For a non-compoundable offence, a compromise between the parties does not by itself bring the case to an end. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (24 September 2012), a bench of three judges of the Supreme Court explained that the High Court’s power to quash a case on settlement “is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code”, and that heinous offences “cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute”. Those routes are explained further below.
Section 359 BNSS (formerly Section 320 CrPC): the law in brief
Section 359 BNSS, headed “Compounding of offences”, sits in Chapter XXVI of the BNSS (general provisions as to inquiries and trials). Its nine sub-sections do the following:
| Sub-section | What it says |
|---|---|
| 359(1) | Offences in the first table “may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table” (no permission of the court needed). |
| 359(2) | Offences in the second table may, “with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending”, be compounded by the persons named. |
| 359(3) | Abetment of a compoundable offence, an attempt to commit it (where the attempt is itself an offence), and liability under Section 3(5) BNS (common intention, formerly Section 34 IPC) or Section 190 BNS (unlawful assembly, formerly Section 149 IPC) “may be compounded in like manner”. |
| 359(4) | If the person entitled to compound is a child or of unsound mind, “any person competent to contract on his behalf may, with the permission of the Court”, compound; if that person is dead, his legal representative (as defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908) may do so “with the consent of the Court”. |
| 359(5) | After the accused has been committed for trial, or has been convicted and an appeal is pending, no composition is allowed “without the leave of the Court to which he is committed, or, as the case may be, before which the appeal is to be heard”. |
| 359(6) | A High Court or Court of Session exercising revisional powers under Section 442 BNSS (formerly Section 401 CrPC) “may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound”. |
| 359(7) | “No offence shall be compounded if the accused is, by reason of a previous conviction, liable either to enhanced punishment or to a punishment of a different kind for such offence.” |
| 359(8) | Composition “shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded”. |
| 359(9) | “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section.” |
India Code’s text of the BNSS (as on 6 October 2025, the current version when this page was updated) shows no amendment of Section 359. Cases that were already pending on 1 July 2024 continue under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: under Section 531(2)(a) BNSS, a pending “appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation” is to be disposed of or continued under the old Code “as if this Sanhita had not come into force”. In those cases Section 320 CrPC, with the old IPC section numbers, still applies. The firm’s IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS comparison tool gives the old and new numbers for any section.
List of compoundable offences under Section 359 BNSS
The two tables below reproduce every entry of the tables in Section 359 BNSS, in the order and words of the Act (one long description is shortened, as marked). The column “Formerly (IPC)” gives the corresponding section of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 from the firm’s Gazette-checked comparison data; it is the number to use for a case still governed by Section 320 CrPC. A downloadable PDF is not offered, but the page, including both tables, can be printed or saved as a PDF from the browser’s print option.
Table 1: offences compoundable without the court’s permission (Section 359(1))
| Offence | BNS section | Formerly (IPC) | Who may compound |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman | 84 | 498 | The husband of the woman and the woman |
| Voluntarily causing hurt | 115(2) | 323 | The person to whom the hurt is caused |
| Voluntarily causing hurt on provocation | 122(1) | 334 | The person to whom the hurt is caused |
| Voluntarily causing grievous hurt on grave and sudden provocation | 122(2) | 335 | The person to whom the hurt is caused |
| Wrongfully restraining or confining any person | 126(2), 127(2) | 341, 342 | The person restrained or confined |
| Wrongfully confining a person for three days or more | 127(3) | 343 | The person confined |
| Wrongfully confining a person for ten days or more | 127(4) | 344 | The person confined |
| Wrongfully confining a person in secret | 127(6) | 346 | The person confined |
| Assault or use of criminal force | 131, 133, 136 | 352, 355, 358 | The person assaulted or to whom criminal force is used |
| Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person | 302 | 298 | The person whose religious feelings are intended to be wounded |
| Theft | 303(2) | 379 | The owner of the property stolen |
| Dishonest misappropriation of property | 314 | 403 | The owner of the property misappropriated |
| Criminal breach of trust by a carrier, wharfinger, etc. | 316(3) | 407 | The owner of the property in respect of which the breach of trust has been committed |
| Dishonestly receiving stolen property knowing it to be stolen | 317(2) | 411 | The owner of the property stolen |
| Assisting in the concealment or disposal of stolen property, knowing it to be stolen | 317(5) | 414 | The owner of the property stolen |
| Cheating | 318(2) | 417 | The person cheated |
| Cheating by personation | 319(2) | 419 | The person cheated |
| Fraudulent removal or concealment of property, etc., to prevent distribution among creditors | 320 | 421 | The creditors who are affected thereby |
| Fraudulently preventing from being made available for his creditors a debt or demand due to the offender | 321 | 422 | The creditors who are affected thereby |
| Fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing false statement of consideration | 322 | 423 | The person affected thereby |
| Fraudulent removal or concealment of property | 323 | 424 | The person affected thereby |
| Mischief, when the only loss or damage caused is loss or damage to a private person | 324(2), 324(4) | 426, 427 | The person to whom the loss or damage is caused |
| Mischief by killing or maiming animal | 325 | 428, 429 | The owner of the animal |
| Mischief by injury to works of irrigation by wrongfully diverting water when the only loss or damage caused is loss or damage to private person | 326(a) | 430 | The person to whom the loss or damage is caused |
| Criminal trespass | 329(3) | 447 | The person in possession of the property trespassed upon |
| House-trespass | 329(4) | 448 | The person in possession of the property trespassed upon |
| House-trespass to commit an offence (other than theft) punishable with imprisonment | 332(c) | 451 | The person in possession of the house trespassed upon |
| Using a false trade or property mark | 345(3) | 482 | The person to whom loss or injury is caused by such use |
| Counterfeiting a property mark used by another | 347(1) | 483 | The person to whom loss or injury is caused by such use |
| Selling goods marked with a counterfeit property mark | 349 | 486 | The person to whom loss or injury is caused by such use |
| Criminal intimidation | 351(2), 351(3) | 506 | The person intimidated |
| Insult intended to provoke a breach of peace | 352 | 504 | The person insulted |
| Inducing person to believe himself an object of divine displeasure | 354 | 508 | The person induced |
| Defamation, except the case listed against Section 356(2) in Table 2 (shortened) | 356(2) | 500 | The person defamed |
| Printing or engraving matter, knowing it to be defamatory | 356(3) | 501 | The person defamed |
| Sale of printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter, knowing it to contain such matter | 356(4) | 502 | The person defamed |
| Criminal breach of contract of service | 357 | 491 | The person with whom the offender has contracted |
Two entries need a note. The mischief entry covers Section 324(2) BNS (simple mischief) and Section 324(4) BNS (loss or damage “to the amount of twenty thousand rupees and more but less than one lakh rupees”), and only “when the only loss or damage caused is loss or damage to a private person”; mischief causing loss of one lakh rupees or more (Section 324(5)) and mischief to property including that of the Government or a local authority (Section 324(3)) are not in the table. The last entry is described in the BNSS table as “Criminal breach of contract of service”; the heading of Section 357 BNS itself is “Breach of contract to attend on and supply wants of helpless person”.
Table 2: offences compoundable only with the court’s permission (Section 359(2))
| Offence | BNS section | Formerly (IPC) | Who may compound |
|---|---|---|---|
| Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman | 79 | 509 | The woman whom it was intended to insult or whose privacy was intruded upon |
| Marrying again during the life-time of a husband or wife | 82(1) | 494 | The husband or wife of the person so marrying |
| Causing miscarriage | 88 | 312 | The woman to whom miscarriage is caused |
| Voluntarily causing grievous hurt | 117(2) | 325 | The person to whom hurt is caused |
| Causing hurt by doing an act so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others | 125(a) | 337 | The person to whom hurt is caused |
| Causing grievous hurt by doing an act so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others | 125(b) | 338 | The person to whom hurt is caused |
| Assault or criminal force in attempting wrongfully to confine a person | 135 | 357 | The person assaulted or to whom the force was used |
| Theft, by clerk or servant of property in possession of master | 306 | 381 | The owner of the property stolen |
| Criminal breach of trust | 316(2) | 406 | The owner of the property in respect of which breach of trust has been committed |
| Criminal breach of trust by a clerk or servant | 316(4) | 408 | The owner of the property in respect of which the breach of trust has been committed |
| Cheating a person whose interest the offender was bound, either by law or by legal contract, to protect | 318(3) | 418 | The person cheated |
| Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security | 318(4) | 420 | The person cheated |
| Defamation against the President or the Vice-President or the Governor of the State or the Administrator of the Union territory or a Minister in respect of his public functions when instituted upon a complaint made by the public prosecutor | 356(2) | 500 | The person defamed |
The “court” in Table 2 is the court “before which any prosecution for such offence is pending”, that is, the trial court, or the appellate or revisional court where the case is at that stage (Section 359(5) and (6)). The tables contain no limit on the value of the property involved. For more on two of the commonest entries, see the firm’s posts on Section 379 IPC (theft, now Section 303(2) BNS) and defamation.
What changed from Section 320 CrPC
Section 359 BNSS replaced Section 320 CrPC on 1 July 2024. According to the firm’s section-by-section comparison data, checked against the Gazette text: “In the table of compoundable offences, the corresponding IPC sections are replaced by BNS sections. Section 497 IPC is excluded as it is not included in BNS. The rest remains same.” In practice that means:
- Every entry now names a BNS section instead of an IPC section. The offences are broadly the same, but each entry now covers only what its BNS section covers. For example, the mischief entry names Section 324(2) and Section 324(4) BNS (loss of twenty thousand rupees or more but less than one lakh rupees, which the firm’s comparison data marks “Newly added” against Section 427 IPC), so mischief causing loss of one lakh rupees or more (Section 324(5)) is not compoundable.
- Adultery (Section 497 IPC) has gone from the table, because the BNS has no corresponding offence. Enticing or detaining a married woman (formerly Section 498 IPC, now Section 84 BNS) remains in Table 1.
- Sub-section (3) now refers to joint liability under Section 3(5) BNS (formerly Section 34 IPC) and Section 190 BNS (formerly Section 149 IPC), and sub-section (6) to revision under Section 442 BNSS (formerly Section 401 CrPC).
- Every entry has a corresponding IPC section in the firm’s comparison data. Offences created for the first time by the BNS, and new sub-sections such as Section 324(3) and 324(5), are not in either table, so they are non-compoundable unless another law says otherwise.
Readers sometimes see claims that the BNSS raised property-value limits for compounding theft or breach of trust. The tables in Section 359 BNSS contain no value limit at all: theft under Section 303(2) BNS is compoundable by the owner without permission whatever the value, and criminal breach of trust under Section 316(2) BNS is compoundable with the court’s permission.
Who may compound, and when
The person named in the table
Only the person named in the third column may compound: for hurt, “The person to whom the hurt is caused”; for theft, “The owner of the property stolen”; for bigamy, “The husband or wife of the person so marrying”; for enticing a married woman, “The husband of the woman and the woman”. A settlement with anyone else, such as a relative who is not the person named, is not a composition under Section 359.
Abetment, attempt and joint liability
Under Section 359(3), where an offence is compoundable, “the abetment of such offence or an attempt to commit such offence (when such attempt is itself an offence)” may be compounded in the same way, and so may the liability of an accused who is charged with the help of Section 3(5) BNS (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) or Section 190 BNS (every member of an unlawful assembly guilty of an offence committed in prosecution of the common object).
A victim who is a child, of unsound mind, or has died
Section 359(4)(a): when the person who could compound “is a child or of unsound mind, any person competent to contract on his behalf may, with the permission of the Court, compound such offence”. A child means a person below the age of eighteen years (Section 2(3) BNS, which applies to the BNSS through Section 2(2) BNSS). Because the court’s permission is needed, even a Table 1 offence then requires an application to the court.
Section 359(4)(b): when that person “is dead, the legal representative, as defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) of such person may, with the consent of the Court, compound such offence.”
After committal, during an appeal and in revision
Compounding is not limited to the trial. Under Section 359(5), once the accused has been committed for trial, or has been convicted and an appeal is pending, composition needs “the leave of the Court to which he is committed, or, as the case may be, before which the appeal is to be heard”. Under Section 359(6), a High Court or Court of Session hearing a revision may allow any person to compound an offence which that person is competent to compound. If the composition is allowed at the appeal stage, Section 359(8) gives it the effect of an acquittal.
Previous conviction: no compounding
Section 359(7) is a bar: “No offence shall be compounded if the accused is, by reason of a previous conviction, liable either to enhanced punishment or to a punishment of a different kind for such offence.” Theft is an example of an offence with a heavier punishment on a later conviction: Section 303(2) BNS provides that “in case of second or subsequent conviction” the punishment is rigorous imprisonment “which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to five years and with fine”.
How an offence is compounded, and what happens after
The BNSS does not prescribe a form for compounding. What the section requires is that the composition is made by the person named in the table (or the person allowed by Section 359(4)), in a case where the offence is listed, and, for Table 2 offences and in the situations covered by Section 359(4) and (5), that the court gives its permission or leave. Because the result is an acquittal under Section 359(8), the composition has to be brought before the court in which the case is pending. For a Table 2 offence the court may refuse permission; the Act gives no list of grounds, so the decision is the court’s.
The result is fixed by Section 359(8): “The composition of an offence under this section shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded.” Where there are several accused, the acquittal is of the accused “with whom the offence has been compounded”. Where a case involves both a compoundable and a non-compoundable offence, compounding can dispose of only the compoundable one; the non-compoundable charge continues unless it is ended by one of the routes described below.
Non-compoundable offences: examples
Any offence that is not in the two tables is non-compoundable. The table below gives common examples; none of these BNS sections appears in Section 359. The old IPC numbers are from the firm’s comparison data.
| Offence | BNS section | Formerly (IPC) |
|---|---|---|
| Punishment for murder | 103(1) | 302 |
| Attempt to murder | 109 | 307 |
| Rape | 64 | 376(1), (2) |
| Dowry death | 80 | 304B |
| Cruelty by husband or relative of husband | 85 | 498A |
| Assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty | 74 | 354 |
| Kidnapping | 137(2) | 363 |
| Dacoity | 310(2) | 395 |
| Criminal conspiracy | 61(2) | 120B |
| Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means | 118(1) | 324 |
| Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means | 118(2) | 326 |
| Rash driving or riding on a public way | 281 | 279 |
| Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant or agent | 316(5) | 409 |
| Mischief by injury to public road, bridge, navigable river or navigable channel | 326(b) | 431 |
| Counterfeiting a mark used by a public servant | 347(2) | 484 |
Some pairs are easy to confuse. Insulting the modesty of a woman by word, gesture or act (Section 79 BNS, formerly 509 IPC) is compoundable with permission, but assault or criminal force with intent to outrage her modesty (Section 74 BNS, formerly 354 IPC) is not compoundable at all. Simple hurt (Section 115(2)) is compoundable without permission, grievous hurt (Section 117(2)) with permission, but hurt by dangerous weapons or means (Section 118(1)) is not compoundable. Criminal breach of trust is compoundable with permission (Section 316(2)) or without it for a carrier or wharfinger (Section 316(3)), but not when committed by a public servant, banker, merchant or agent (Section 316(5)). See also the firm’s posts on Section 354 IPC and Section 498A IPC (now Section 85 BNS).
Prepared by Century Law Firm from Sections 289, 359, 360 and 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (India Code, as on 6 October 2025), Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 19(5) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012).
Can a non-compoundable case be settled? The routes that exist
A non-compoundable offence cannot be compounded, but other routes can end the case, each with its own conditions. None is a right of the parties; each depends on a court (and, for withdrawal, the prosecutor).
Quashing by the High Court under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC)
Section 528 BNSS preserves “the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice”. The firm’s comparison data records “No change” from Section 482 CrPC, so the Supreme Court’s judgments under Section 482 continue to guide its use. The firm’s guide to quashing of FIR explains the procedure.
In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (24 September 2012), Justices R.M. Lodha, Anil R. Dave and Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya answered a reference which had doubted earlier decisions, including B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, and held that those decisions were not wrongly decided. The Court said that whether a case may be quashed on settlement “would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed”, but drew two lines. On one side, “Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.” and offences under special statutes such as the Prevention of Corruption Act, or by public servants while working in that capacity, are not to be quashed on compromise. On the other side, “criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing”: in particular, offences arising from “commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions”, offences arising out of matrimony “relating to dowry, etc.”, and family disputes, where “the parties have resolved their entire dispute”. In those cases the High Court may quash if, because of the compromise, “the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak” and continuing the case would cause oppression and injustice. The case was decided under Section 482 CrPC, now Section 528 BNSS.
In Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (27 March 2014), Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and A.K. Sikri set out seven principles. The first: the power under Section 482 “is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code”, and although the High Court may quash “even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves”, “this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.” Cases “arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes” should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes. Offences under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder, now Section 109 BNS) are generally heinous, though the High Court may look at the injuries, weapons and medical evidence to see whether the charge is there “for the sake of it”. And “timings of settlement play a crucial role”: the court may be liberal during investigation, should normally refrain when the evidence is almost complete, and a “mere compromise” after a conviction for a heinous crime is not enough. On the facts, the Supreme Court accepted the compromise and quashed the FIR, which had been registered under Sections 307, 324, 323 and 34 IPC.
Plea bargaining: Chapter XXIII BNSS (Sections 289 to 300)
Plea bargaining is not a settlement that ends the case without punishment; it is a way of disposing of the case with a reduced sentence and, often, compensation to the victim. Under Section 289(1) BNSS (formerly Section 265A CrPC), it applies only to offences for which the punishment is not death, life imprisonment or imprisonment for more than seven years, and “does not apply where such offence affects the socio-economic condition of the country or has been committed against a woman, or a child”. (The firm’s comparison data notes that the old words “below the age of fourteen years” have been removed, so the bar now covers offences against any child.)
The accused must apply “within a period of thirty days from the date of framing of charge” with an affidavit that he is doing so voluntarily and has not previously been convicted of the same offence (Section 290(1) and (2)). The court examines him in camera and, if satisfied, gives “time, not exceeding sixty days” to work out “a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case which may include giving to the victim by the accused the compensation and other expenses” (Section 290(4)(a)). If a disposition is reached, the court awards the compensation and sentences the accused: where the law provides a minimum punishment, to half of it (one-fourth for a first-time offender); otherwise to one-fourth of the punishment provided (one-sixth for a first-time offender), or it may release him on probation or after admonition (Section 293). The judgment is final, and no appeal lies except a special leave petition under Article 136 or a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution (Section 295). Statements made in the application cannot be used for any other purpose (Section 299), and the Chapter does not apply to a juvenile or child (Section 300).
Lok Adalat: only for compoundable offences
A Lok Adalat organised under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 can settle cases pending before a court and disputes not yet in court (Section 19(5)), but “the Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law” (proviso to Section 19(5)). So a Lok Adalat can settle a compoundable criminal case, including a cheque bounce case, but not a non-compoundable one. Every award of a Lok Adalat “shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any court against the award” (Section 21(2)).
Withdrawal from prosecution: Section 360 BNSS (formerly Section 321 CrPC)
Withdrawal is not compounding. It is the Public Prosecutor’s power, not the victim’s: “The Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of a case may, with the consent of the Court, at any time before the judgment is pronounced, withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of any one or more of the offences for which he is tried”. If the withdrawal is before a charge is framed, the accused is discharged; if after a charge is framed, or in a case where no charge is required, he is acquitted (Section 360(a) and (b)). For offences connected with the Union’s executive power, investigated under a Central Act, involving Central Government property, or committed by a Central Government servant on duty, a prosecutor not appointed by the Central Government needs its permission (first proviso). The BNSS added a second proviso: “no Court shall allow such withdrawal without giving an opportunity of being heard to the victim in the case.”
| Route | Who starts it, and which offences | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Compounding (Section 359 BNSS) | The person named in the table; only listed offences (Table 2 and some cases need the court’s permission) | Effect of an acquittal (Section 359(8)) |
| Lok Adalat (Legal Services Authorities Act, Sections 19 to 21) | Reference by the court or the legal services authority; only compoundable offences | Award, final and binding; no appeal |
| Quashing (Section 528 BNSS) | Petition to the High Court; any offence, but not heinous offences and not as of right | FIR or proceedings quashed |
| Plea bargaining (Sections 289 to 300 BNSS) | Application by the accused within 30 days of the charge; offences up to 7 years, not against a woman or child, not socio-economic | Reduced sentence or probation, usually with compensation to the victim; final judgment |
| Withdrawal (Section 360 BNSS) | The Public Prosecutor, with the court’s consent, before judgment; victim to be heard | Discharge (before charge) or acquittal (after charge, or where no charge is required) |
Special Acts with their own compounding rule: cheque bounce
Section 359(9) BNSS says that no offence shall be compounded except as provided by that section, but a special Act can make its own offences compoundable. A well-known example is Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, inserted with effect from 6 February 2003: “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.” So the offence of dishonour of a cheque under Section 138 of that Act is compoundable; Section 147 itself says nothing about the stage or the conditions, which the Supreme Court has addressed in its guidelines (below). The firm’s guide to the cheque bounce case under Section 138 explains the rest of the procedure.
In Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (3 May 2010), Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices P. Sathasivam and J.M. Panchal held that, because of the non-obstante clause, compounding under the Act “is controlled by Section 147” and the scheme of Section 320 CrPC “will not be applicable in the strict sense”, and that Section 147 overrides Section 320(9) CrPC. Noting that Section 147 gives no guidance on the stage at which compounding can be done, and that late compounding burdens the courts, the Court laid down guidelines imposing costs on an accused who compounds at a late stage, calling them “a means to encourage compounding at an early stage of litigation”. Courts apply the Supreme Court’s guidelines on costs for late compounding; any scale of costs should be checked against the Supreme Court’s latest judgments before it is relied on. The firm’s cheque bounce FAQs deal with cheque bounce procedure in more detail.
Several other Acts on India Code contain their own sections on compounding of offences (often headed “Compounding of offences” or “Power to compound offences”). Where an offence is under such an Act, that Act’s section, its conditions and the authority it names apply, not the tables in Section 359 BNSS.
Difference between compoundable and non-compoundable offences
| Point | Compoundable offence | Non-compoundable offence |
|---|---|---|
| Where the law lists it | One of the two tables of Section 359 BNSS, or a special Act such as Section 147 NI Act | Anything not listed (Section 359(9)) |
| Can the victim settle it? | Yes, the person named in the table, with or without the court’s permission as the table says | No; a compromise does not end the case by itself |
| Effect of settlement | Effect of an acquittal (Section 359(8)) | The case continues unless the High Court quashes it (Section 528), it is disposed of by plea bargaining, or the prosecutor withdraws with the court’s consent (Section 360) |
| Lok Adalat | Can be settled there | No jurisdiction (Section 19(5) proviso, Legal Services Authorities Act) |
| Typical examples | Hurt, wrongful restraint, simple assault, theft, cheating, criminal trespass, defamation, criminal intimidation, cheque bounce | Murder, attempt to murder, rape, dowry death, cruelty to a married woman, outraging modesty, kidnapping, dacoity |
Compoundable is a separate question from bailable or cognizable. A “bailable offence” is one “shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or which is made bailable by any other law” (Section 2(1)(c) BNSS), and a “cognizable offence” one for which the police may arrest without warrant under the First Schedule or another law (Section 2(1)(g)). An offence can be cognizable and non-bailable and still compoundable: theft under Section 303(2) BNS, which is in general cognizable and non-bailable (the First Schedule treats theft of property worth less than five thousand rupees by a first offender differently), is an example. For how to report an offence to the police, see the firm’s guide on how to file a police complaint and FIR.
शमनीय और अशमनीय अपराध – हिंदी में सारांश (Summary in Hindi)
शमनीय अपराध (compoundable offence) वह अपराध है जिसमें कानून पीड़ित व्यक्ति को अभियुक्त से समझौता करके मामला समाप्त करने की अनुमति देता है। परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम, 1881 और विधिक सेवा प्राधिकरण अधिनियम, 1987 के आधिकारिक हिंदी पाठ में “compoundable” के लिए “शमनीय” शब्द प्रयोग हुआ है; परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम, 1881 की धारा 147 का आधिकारिक हिंदी शीर्षक “अपराध का शमनीय होना” है। अपराध का शमन (compounding) होने पर मामला समाप्त हो जाता है और अभियुक्त दोषमुक्त माना जाता है। इस पृष्ठ पर भारतीय नागरिक सुरक्षा संहिता का हिंदी अनुवाद हमारा अपना सरल अनुवाद है, आधिकारिक पाठ नहीं।
कानून कहाँ है: 1 जुलाई 2024 से भारतीय नागरिक सुरक्षा संहिता, 2023 (BNSS) की धारा 359 (पहले दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 की धारा 320) शमनीय अपराधों की सूची देती है। इसमें दो सारणियाँ हैं। पहली सारणी (धारा 359(1)) के अपराधों का शमन सारणी में बताया गया व्यक्ति न्यायालय की अनुमति के बिना कर सकता है, जैसे साधारण उपहति (धारा 115(2) BNS, पहले IPC 323), सदोष अवरोध और परिरोध, साधारण हमला, चोरी (303(2), पहले 379), साधारण छल (318(2), पहले 417), आपराधिक अतिचार और गृह-अतिचार, आपराधिक अभित्रास (351(2), (3), पहले 506) और मानहानि (356(2), पहले 500)। दूसरी सारणी (धारा 359(2)) के अपराधों का शमन केवल उस न्यायालय की अनुमति से हो सकता है जिसके सामने मामला लंबित है, जैसे घोर उपहति (117(2), पहले 325), द्विविवाह (82(1), पहले 494), आपराधिक न्यासभंग (316(2), पहले 406) और छल करके संपत्ति दिलवाना (318(4), पहले 420)।
शमन कौन कर सकता है: केवल वही व्यक्ति जिसका नाम सारणी के तीसरे कॉलम में है, सामान्यतः पीड़ित, जैसे जिसे चोट लगी, जिसकी संपत्ति चोरी हुई या जिसके साथ छल हुआ। यदि वह व्यक्ति बालक (18 वर्ष से कम) है या विकृतचित्त है, तो उसकी ओर से संविदा करने में सक्षम व्यक्ति न्यायालय की अनुमति से शमन कर सकता है; यदि उसकी मृत्यु हो गई है, तो उसका विधिक प्रतिनिधि न्यायालय की सहमति से (धारा 359(4))। दुष्प्रेरण (abetment) और प्रयत्न (attempt) का भी उसी प्रकार शमन हो सकता है (धारा 359(3))। विचारण के लिए सुपुर्द किए जाने के बाद या अपील लंबित होने पर उस न्यायालय की इजाज़त (leave) चाहिए (धारा 359(5)), और पुनरीक्षण में उच्च न्यायालय या सत्र न्यायालय शमन की अनुमति दे सकता है (धारा 359(6))। यदि पिछली दोषसिद्धि के कारण अभियुक्त बढ़े हुए या भिन्न प्रकार के दंड का भागी है, तो शमन नहीं होगा (धारा 359(7))। शमन का प्रभाव अभियुक्त की दोषमुक्ति (acquittal) है (धारा 359(8))।
अशमनीय अपराध (non-compoundable offence): जो अपराध इन दोनों सारणियों में नहीं है, उसका शमन नहीं हो सकता, क्योंकि धारा 359(9) कहती है कि इस धारा में दिए गए उपबंध के सिवाय किसी अपराध का शमन नहीं किया जाएगा। विधिक सेवा प्राधिकरण अधिनियम, 1987 के आधिकारिक हिंदी पाठ में ऐसे अपराध को “जो किसी विधि के अधीन शमनीय नहीं है” कहा गया है। उदाहरण: हत्या (103(1), पहले 302), हत्या का प्रयत्न (109, पहले 307), बलात्संग (64, पहले 376), दहेज मृत्यु (80, पहले 304B), पति या उसके नातेदार द्वारा क्रूरता (85, पहले 498A), स्त्री की लज्जा भंग करने के आशय से हमला (74, पहले 354), व्यपहरण, डकैती और आपराधिक षड्यंत्र। ध्यान दें: स्त्री की लज्जा का अपमान करने वाले शब्द या इशारे (79, पहले 509) का शमन न्यायालय की अनुमति से हो सकता है, पर धारा 74 का नहीं।
अशमनीय मामले में समझौते के रास्ते: केवल समझौता होने से मामला समाप्त नहीं होता। उच्च न्यायालय धारा 528 BNSS (पहले धारा 482 CrPC) की अंतर्निहित शक्ति से, समझौते के आधार पर, कार्यवाही रद्द (quash) कर सकता है। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने ज्ञान सिंह बनाम पंजाब राज्य (2012) और नरिंदर सिंह बनाम पंजाब राज्य (2014) में कहा कि हत्या, बलात्संग, डकैती जैसे गंभीर अपराध समझौते पर रद्द नहीं किए जाने चाहिए, पर मुख्यतः दीवानी प्रकृति के, व्यापारिक, वैवाहिक या पारिवारिक विवादों से जुड़े मामले, जहाँ पक्षकारों ने पूरा विवाद सुलझा लिया है, रद्द किए जा सकते हैं। अभिवाक् सौदेबाजी (plea bargaining, धारा 289 से 300) सात वर्ष तक के दंड वाले अपराधों में, आरोप विरचित होने के 30 दिन के भीतर आवेदन पर, उपलब्ध है; यह स्त्री या बालक के विरुद्ध अपराधों और सामाजिक-आर्थिक अपराधों पर लागू नहीं होती, और इसमें कम दंड मिलता है, दोषमुक्ति नहीं। लोक अदालत केवल शमनीय अपराधों का निपटारा कर सकती है। लोक अभियोजक न्यायालय की सहमति से अभियोजन वापस ले सकता है (धारा 360), पर पीड़ित को सुनना आवश्यक है।
चेक बाउंस: परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम की धारा 147 के अनुसार, दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, इस अधिनियम के अधीन दंडनीय प्रत्येक अपराध शमनीय होगा। धारा 147 शमन के चरण या शर्तों के बारे में कुछ नहीं कहती। दामोदर एस. प्रभु (2010) में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने कहा कि इस अधिनियम के अपराधों का शमन धारा 147 से नियंत्रित होता है, और देर से शमन पर खर्च (costs) के बारे में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने दिशानिर्देश दिए हैं, जिन्हें न्यायालय लागू करते हैं। खर्च की वर्तमान दर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के नवीनतम निर्णयों में देख लेनी चाहिए।
Frequently asked questions
It is an offence that the law allows the victim, or the person named by the law, to settle with the accused so that the case ends. The offences are listed in the two tables of Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 320 CrPC): some may be compounded without the court’s permission, others only with the permission of the court where the case is pending. Compounding has “the effect of an acquittal” (Section 359(8)).
It is any offence that is not in the tables of Section 359 BNSS and is not made compoundable by another Act. Section 359(9) says: “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section.” Murder, attempt to murder, rape, dowry death, cruelty by a husband or his relatives (Section 85 BNS, formerly 498A IPC) and kidnapping are examples. A compromise does not end such a case by itself; only routes such as quashing by the High Court can.
शमनीय अपराध वह अपराध है जिसमें पीड़ित व्यक्ति अभियुक्त से समझौता करके मामला समाप्त कर सकता है। परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम, 1881 और विधिक सेवा प्राधिकरण अधिनियम, 1987 के आधिकारिक हिंदी पाठ में “compoundable” के लिए “शमनीय” शब्द है, जैसे परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम की धारा 147, “अपराध का शमनीय होना”। सूची भारतीय नागरिक सुरक्षा संहिता, 2023 की धारा 359 (पहले CrPC की धारा 320) में है, और शमन का प्रभाव अभियुक्त की दोषमुक्ति है।
In plain Hindi it is an अशमनीय अपराध: an offence that cannot be settled by compromise between the victim and the accused. The official Hindi text of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 describes such an offence as one “जो किसी विधि के अधीन शमनीय नहीं है” (which is not compoundable under any law). The word अशमनीय is used on this page as plain Hindi, not as a term taken from an official text.
Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, headed “Compounding of offences”, replaced Section 320 CrPC from 1 July 2024. It contains a table of offences compoundable without permission (sub-section (1)), a table of offences compoundable with the court’s permission (sub-section (2)), rules on abetment and attempt, child or deceased victims, appeals and revisions, a bar for accused with a previous conviction, the effect of acquittal, and the rule that nothing else may be compounded.
Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was the earlier provision on compounding, with tables listing IPC sections. It is now Section 359 BNSS; according to the firm’s comparison data the IPC sections were replaced by BNS sections and the entry for adultery (Section 497 IPC) was dropped. For appeals, trials, inquiries and investigations already pending on 1 July 2024, the old Code continues to apply (Section 531(2)(a) BNSS).
The complete list is in the two tables of Section 359 BNSS, reproduced in full on this page with the BNS section, the old IPC section and the person who may compound. There are 37 entries in the first table and 13 in the second. A downloadable PDF is not offered, but the page can be printed or saved as a PDF from the browser’s print option. The official text of the BNSS is on India Code.
Those in the table under Section 359(1) BNSS, including voluntarily causing hurt (115(2)), wrongful restraint and confinement (126(2), 127(2), (3), (4) and (6)), simple assault (131, 133, 136), theft (303(2)), dishonest misappropriation (314), receiving stolen property (317(2)), simple cheating (318(2)), mischief causing loss only to a private person (324(2), 324(4)), criminal trespass and house-trespass (329(3), (4)), criminal intimidation (351(2), (3)), intentional insult (352) and defamation (356(2), (3), (4)). The person named in the table compounds.
The 13 entries in the table under Section 359(2) BNSS: insult to the modesty of a woman (79), bigamy (82(1)), causing miscarriage (88), grievous hurt (117(2)), hurt or grievous hurt by a rash or negligent act (125(a), (b)), assault in attempting wrongful confinement (135), theft by a clerk or servant (306), criminal breach of trust (316(2)) and by a clerk or servant (316(4)), cheating under 318(3) and 318(4), and defamation of the President and other high functionaries on a public prosecutor’s complaint (356(2)).
There is no separate list: every offence that is not in the tables of Section 359 BNSS is non-compoundable (Section 359(9)), unless a special Act says otherwise. Examples are murder (103(1) BNS, formerly 302 IPC), attempt to murder (109, formerly 307), rape (64, formerly 376), dowry death (80, formerly 304B), cruelty (85, formerly 498A), outraging modesty (74, formerly 354), kidnapping (137(2), formerly 363), dacoity (310(2), formerly 395), hurt by dangerous weapons (118(1), formerly 324) and rash driving (281, formerly 279).
A compoundable offence is listed in Section 359 BNSS (or made compoundable by a special Act) and can be settled by the person named in the table, which has the effect of an acquittal; a Lok Adalat can also settle it. A non-compoundable offence is not listed and cannot be settled by the parties; the case continues unless the High Court quashes it under Section 528 BNSS, it is disposed of by plea bargaining, or the prosecutor withdraws with the court’s consent.
The person named in the table of Section 359 BNSS settles with the accused and the composition is placed before the court where the case is pending, which gives effect to it. For offences in the second table, and where the victim is a child, of unsound mind or has died, the court’s permission or consent is needed; after committal or during an appeal, the leave of that court (Section 359(4) and (5)). The BNSS prescribes no special form.
The parties cannot make it compoundable: “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section” (Section 359(9) BNSS). But the High Court may quash proceedings on a genuine settlement under Section 528 BNSS (formerly 482 CrPC) where the dispute is essentially private, such as commercial, matrimonial or family disputes, though not for heinous offences like murder, rape or dacoity (Gian Singh, 2012; Narinder Singh, 2014). Plea bargaining is another route for some offences.
In a compoundable case, the victim and the accused can end the case by compounding, at trial or later with the leave the law requires, and the accused is treated as acquitted (Section 359(8) BNSS); a Lok Adalat can also settle it. In a non-compoundable case, the trial goes on despite a compromise unless the High Court quashes it, it is disposed of by plea bargaining, or the prosecutor withdraws under Section 360 BNSS.
No. Theft (Section 303(2) BNS), dishonest misappropriation (314), receiving stolen property (317(2)), simple cheating (318(2)), criminal trespass (329(3)) and private mischief (324(2), 324(4)) are compoundable without permission; theft by a clerk or servant (306), criminal breach of trust (316(2), (4)) and cheating under 318(4) need the court’s permission. Robbery, dacoity, criminal breach of trust by a public servant or banker (316(5)) and mischief to public roads, bridges or navigable rivers or channels (326(b)) are not compoundable.
The law, not the parties or the court. Section 359 BNSS lists the compoundable offences and the person who may compound each one, and any other offence is non-compoundable unless a special Act, such as Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, makes it compoundable. What the court decides is whether to grant permission for offences in the second table, and whether to give leave at the appeal stage.
Section 359(8) BNSS says: “The composition of an offence under this section shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded.” So the case ends in the accused’s favour. If there are several accused, only those with whom the offence was compounded are acquitted, and any non-compoundable charge in the same case continues.
Yes, if it is compoundable. Under Section 359(5) BNSS, when the accused has been convicted and an appeal is pending, composition needs “the leave of the Court … before which the appeal is to be heard”. Under Section 359(6), a High Court or Court of Session hearing a revision may allow compounding by a person competent to compound. The composition then has the effect of an acquittal (Section 359(8)).
If the victim is a child (below 18) or of unsound mind, “any person competent to contract on his behalf may, with the permission of the Court, compound such offence” (Section 359(4)(a) BNSS). If the victim has died, his legal representative, as defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may compound “with the consent of the Court” (Section 359(4)(b)). In both cases the court’s approval is needed even for an offence in the first table.
Yes. Theft under Section 303(2) BNS (formerly Section 379 IPC) is in the first table of Section 359 BNSS, so “The owner of the property stolen” may compound it without the court’s permission, whatever the value. Theft by a clerk or servant of property in possession of the master (Section 306 BNS, formerly 381 IPC) needs the court’s permission. Compounding is barred if a previous conviction makes the accused liable to enhanced punishment (Section 359(7)).
Yes, but only with the court’s permission. “Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security” under Section 318(4) BNS (formerly Section 420 IPC) is in the second table of Section 359 BNSS, and “The person cheated” may compound it with the permission of the court before which the case is pending. Simple cheating under Section 318(2) (formerly 417 IPC) needs no permission.
No. Cruelty by a husband or his relatives under Section 85 BNS (formerly Section 498A IPC) is not in either table of Section 359 BNSS, so it is non-compoundable. Where the parties have settled, the High Court may quash the proceedings under Section 528 BNSS; in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) the Supreme Court included “offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes” among cases that may be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire dispute.
Yes. Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 says that “every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable”, notwithstanding the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 147 says nothing about the stage or the conditions. In Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) the Supreme Court held that compounding under the Act is controlled by Section 147, not by the CrPC tables, and it has laid down guidelines on costs for late compounding, which courts apply; check the current scale in the Supreme Court’s latest judgments before relying on any figure.
Yes, both without the court’s permission. Voluntarily causing hurt under Section 115(2) BNS (formerly 323 IPC) may be compounded by “The person to whom the hurt is caused”, and criminal intimidation under Section 351(2) and (3) BNS (formerly 506 IPC) by “The person intimidated” (first table of Section 359 BNSS). Grievous hurt (117(2), formerly 325) needs permission, and hurt by dangerous weapons (118(1), formerly 324) is not compoundable.
No. Assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty under Section 74 BNS (formerly Section 354 IPC) does not appear in either table of Section 359 BNSS, so it is non-compoundable. A different offence, a word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman under Section 79 BNS (formerly 509 IPC), is compoundable by the woman with the court’s permission.
No; it is not in the tables of Section 359 BNSS. In Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014), decided under Section 307 IPC and Section 482 CrPC, the Supreme Court said such offences are generally heinous, but the High Court may examine whether the charge is there “for the sake of it”, looking at the injuries, weapons and medical evidence and the stage of the case, before accepting a settlement. On the facts, it quashed the FIR.
Compounding (Section 359 BNSS) is a settlement by the victim for a listed offence and has the effect of an acquittal. Plea bargaining (Sections 289 to 300 BNSS) is applied for by the accused within 30 days of the framing of charge, for offences punishable up to seven years (not against a woman or child, and not socio-economic offences); it ends in a reduced sentence (such as half or a quarter of the minimum) or release on probation, usually with compensation to the victim, not an acquittal.
Only a compoundable one. Under the proviso to Section 19(5) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, a Lok Adalat “shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law”. A compoundable case, including a cheque bounce case, can be referred to it, and its award is “final and binding on all the parties” with no appeal (Section 21(2)).
No. Compounding is done by the victim under Section 359 BNSS and only for listed offences. Withdrawal from prosecution under Section 360 BNSS (formerly Section 321 CrPC) is done by the Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor, with the court’s consent, before judgment, for any offence; it leads to discharge if made before a charge is framed and acquittal if made after it or where no charge is required, and the court must give the victim an opportunity of being heard.
No. Whether an offence is bailable or cognizable is decided by the First Schedule of the BNSS or another law (Section 2(1)(c) and (g) BNSS), not by Section 359. Theft under Section 303(2) BNS, for example, is in general cognizable and non-bailable according to the firm’s classification data (theft of property worth less than five thousand rupees by a first offender is treated differently), yet compoundable by the owner without the court’s permission.
Conclusion
Whether a criminal case can be settled depends first on one list: the two tables of Section 359 BNSS (formerly Section 320 CrPC). If the offence is in the first table, the person named may compound it without the court’s permission; if it is in the second, only with the permission of the court where the case is pending; either way, compounding has the effect of an acquittal. Every other offence is non-compoundable, unless a special Act such as the Negotiable Instruments Act makes it compoundable.
For a non-compoundable offence a compromise is not the end of the case. The High Court can quash proceedings under Section 528 BNSS in suitable cases of an essentially private nature, but not heinous offences; plea bargaining reduces the sentence for some offences; a Lok Adalat cannot deal with such offences at all; and withdrawal is a decision for the Public Prosecutor and the court, after hearing the victim. Checking the exact BNS section against the tables above is always the first step.
Sources used for this post: the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 46 of 2023), Sections 2(1)(c), 2(1)(g), 2(1)(o), 2(2), 289 to 300, 359, 360, 442, 528 and 531, India Code (A2023-46.pdf, as on 6 October 2025; https://indiacode.gov.in/server/api/core/bitstreams/73f93470-5f6a-4f0f-bc23-1309e32b9554/content); the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), Sections 2(3), 303, 324 and 357, India Code (a2023-45.pdf, as on 6 October 2025); the firm’s Gazette-checked IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS comparison data (old section numbers, comparison notes and classification); the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 147 (India Code, a1881-26.pdf, no ‘as on’ date, and its official Hindi text H1881-26.pdf); the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Sections 19 to 21 (India Code, a1987-39.pdf, no ‘as on’ date, and its official Hindi text H1987-39.pdf); and the Supreme Court’s own copies of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (Criminal Appeal No. 963 of 2010, 3 May 2010, https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/36294.pdf), Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (SLP (Crl.) No. 8989 of 2010, 24 September 2012, https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/39579.pdf) and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (Criminal Appeal No. 686 of 2014, 27 March 2014, https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/41348.pdf).