Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 · Chapter XIX: Trial Before A Court of Session
Section 251: Framing of charge
In plain words
If the Judge finds ground to presume the accused committed an offence, and it is not triable only by a Court of Session, the Judge can frame a charge and transfer the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate or a first class Magistrate for trial as a warrant-case. If it is triable only by the Court of Session, the Judge must frame a written charge within sixty days of the first hearing on charge.
- The charge is read and explained to the accused, present in person or by audio-video, who is asked whether they plead guilty or claim trial.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓
Official text
(1) If, after such consideration and hearing as aforesaid, the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which—
(a) is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session, he may, frame a charge against the accused and, by order, transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or any other Judicial Magistrate of the first class and direct the accused to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or the Judicial Magistrate of the first class, on such date as he deems fit, and thereupon such Magistrate shall try the offence in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted on a police report;
(b) is exclusively triable by the Court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused within a period of sixty days from the date of first hearing on charge.
(2) Where the Judge frames any charge under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the charge shall be read and explained to the accused present either physically or through audio-video electronic means and the accused shall be asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 12 September 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Understanding this section
Section 251 replaces section 228 of the CrPC: framing of charge in a Sessions trial. It adds a deadline and allows the charge to be explained through audio-video means.
What changed
- For offences exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the charge must be framed within sixty days from the date of first hearing on charge.
- The charge may be read and explained to the accused present physically or through audio-video electronic means.
The standard
Ground for presuming that the accused committed the offence: strong suspicion founded on material, not proof.
Key Supreme Court rulings
Sajjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2010 INSC 624
Decided under section 228 of the CrPC. The court must apply its judicial mind and be satisfied that commission of the offence was possible, without assessing probative value.
Common mistakes
- Applying a standard of proof at the charge stage.
Read with: Section 250 BNSS, Section 228 CrPC
Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 251
No Supreme Court judgment in our database cites this section yet.