Discuss the statutory and constitutional basis of an accused's right to a copy of the FIR. How does the BNSS, 2023 modify the earlier CrPC framework?

The FIR, registered under Section 154 CrPC — now Section 173 BNSS — sets the criminal process in motion [1][2]. Access to it is the accused's first instrument of defence, resting simultaneously on statutory command and on the fair-trial guarantee read into Article 21, and the 2023 recodification strengthens rather than dilutes that entitlement.

Statutory basis

• Section 207 CrPC obliged the Magistrate, in police-report cases, to furnish the accused free of cost copies of the police report, the FIR, witness statements and confessions relied upon [1].
• Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India (2016) created a pre-cognizance right: FIRs must be uploaded on the police/State website within 24 hours, and a certified copy supplied to an applicant-accused within 24 hours [3].
• Disclosure is not absolute — FIRs in sexual offences, POCSO, terrorism and insurgency cases may be withheld from public upload on a senior officer's reasoned decision, with a grievance committee as safeguard [3].

Constitutional basis

• Article 21: a person cannot answer an accusation he has not seen; knowledge of the allegation is intrinsic to fair trial and personal liberty [3].
• Where police stonewall, writ jurisdiction becomes the corrective — recently the Supreme Court directed Ghaziabad police to supply a journalist-accused the FIR copy along with CCTV footage, and restrained coercive action [5].

What the BNSS, 2023 changes

• Section 230 BNSS succeeds Section 207, retaining its essence, and applies from 1 July 2024 [2][4].
• It imposes an outer limit of 14 days from the accused's production or appearance — the CrPC only said "without delay" [1][2].
• Copies must also go free of cost to the victim where represented by an advocate — a victim-centric addition [2].
• Electronic supply of documents is valid compliance, and voluminous records may be furnished digitally or inspected [2].

The BNSS thus converts a judicially-nudged expectation into a time-bound, technology-enabled duty. The remaining gap is compliance at the police-station level; institutionalising automatic digital delivery and departmental accountability for delay would let Section 230 fully realise the Article 21 promise with which the right began.