Introduction
Firstly by looking at the term organized crime ,few questions will come in our mind What is organized crime and what is the meaning of organized crime. Organized crime means any crime or unlawful activity committed by any person with the objectives of gaining pecuniary benefit or undue economic advantage for any personal reason or for prompting insurgency which includes use of violence ,threat , intimidation, or coercion.
Now might be you are thinking what is mafia and how it is related to organized crime. In simple words mafia means a secret, hierarchical criminal organization. It function as governance type organized crime groups, which networked their families.
Meaning and Concept of Organized Crime under BNS
What Is Organized Crime?
The term ‘organized crime’ indicates a well-organized society of individuals who participate in serious and continuous crime for profit. These syndicates usually have a well-established hierarchy or a synchronized system like a company to think, carry out and reap the benefits of their illegal activities. The crime-ridden activities they keep on doing are mostly the ones that lead to very large income and that are even spanning across different locations or continents.
Organized crime is like a monster with many heads that continuously threatens the legal and social order as well as the security of the nation, and it is the main reason for the rise of high-rate crimes that adversely affect our neighborhoods and economy. Though these criminal enterprises are not rare, their operations are like sophisticated and well-planned machines with a hierarchy, and a network of relationships that facilitate the execution of their criminal activities in different countries without getting caught.
Inevitability
The origin of organized crime is not traced to a single location but rather to the various avenues for power and profit that have been created by the times and circumstances changes. It is a wide field of making money and betrayal; the most potent power and hard to fight against resource are loyalty and identity. The 1970s were a turning point because of globalization which made organized crime a global issue, with groups exploiting the voids and causing havoc. The world is now trying to figure out how to deal with the problem and particularly the United Nations and the European Union are trying to define organized crime as a continuous, group-based, and criminal activity.
Definition of Organized Crime in BNS
The BNS has a different line of thought in dealing with organized crime. Section 111(1) Any continuing unlawful activity including kidnapping, robbery, vehicle theft, extortion, land grabbing, contract killing, economic offence, cyber-crimes, trafficking of persons, drugs, weapons or illicit goods or services, human trafficking for prostitution or ransom, by any person or a group of persons acting in concert, singly or jointly, either as a member of an organized crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, by use of violence, threat of violence, intimidation, coercion, or by any other unlawful means to obtain direct or indirect material benefit including a financial benefit, shall constitute organized crime.
Sub section (2) states the punishment for the person who has committed organized crime:
If such offence has resulted in the death of any person, be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees.
In any other case, be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.
Sub section (3) states the punishment for the person who assists the organized crime as:
Whoever abets, attempts, conspires or knowingly facilitates the commission of an organized crime, or otherwise engages in any act preparatory to an organized crime, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.
Sub section (4) states the punishment of the member of the organized crime syndicate as:
Any person who is a member of an Organized crime syndicate shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.
Sub section (5) states the punishment who conceals the information of the offender under this provision as:
Whoever, intentionally, harbors or conceals any person who has committed the offence of an Organized crime shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees.
Sub section (6) states the punishment for the person who keeps the proceeds of crime as:
Whoever possesses any property derived or obtained from the commission of an Organized crime or proceeds of any Organized crime or which has been acquired through the Organized crime, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than two lakh rupees.
Sub section (7) states the punishment for any person who on behalf of the offender keeps the proceeds of crime as:
If any person on behalf of a member of an Organized crime syndicate is, or at any time has been in possession of movable or immovable property which he cannot satisfactorily account for, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for ten years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees.
The Essential Ingredients of Organized Crimes?
- Unlawful activity must be continuous.
- The motive must be to commit crime.
- The crime must be committed by a person, a group of persons either individually or jointly.
- The crime must be committed by using violence, intimidation, threat, coercion or by any other unlawful means.
- The intention must be to take unlawful gain.
The Offences Which Are Covered Under Organized Crimes?
- Kidnapping
- Robbery
- Cyber crimes
- Vehicle theft
- Extortion
- Land grabbing
- Contract killing
- Illicit goods or services
- Human trafficking for prostitution or ransom
- Drugs or weapons
- Economic Offence
Example 1: An International Drug Trafficking Network
A bunch of people set up a really complicated network to transfer huge amounts of illegal drugs from one place to another, selling them off via different regional cells. There is a very visible leader or a council with the making of top-brass decisions, mid-level managers supervising logistics and transportation, and finally, street-level distributors. The drug trade makes money, which is then laundered through businesses that look legitimate so that their illegal origin is hidden.
This is considered organized crime because it is a well-structured group (the network with its hierarchy) that indulges in extensive and continuous criminal activity (smuggling and distribution of drugs) at the same time. The whole operation is planned with the utmost precision (logistics, distribution, money laundering), and the main objective is to earn a lot of money through these illegal activities.
Example 2: A Sophisticated Car Theft and Resale Ring
This example depicts the organized nature of an illicit criminal group which has set out to commit various illegal acts for profit using a variety of means. They have divided the type of work among various members in a specialized way (targeter, thief, VIN modifier, distributor). The type of work being done as members of this organization depicts the systematic nature of the organization in relation to committing illegal acts as well as the cooperation that exists between members of the organization in relation to how they perform their individual roles in the overall operation (e.g., how each person plays a specific role in the overall theft and reselling of the stolen vehicles).
Evolution of Laws against Organized Crime in India
Position before the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Before the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) kicked in on July 1, 2024, and swapped out that ancient Indian Penal Code (IPC), tackling organized crime in India was like trying to catch smoke with your bare hands. Big-time syndicates were basically operating in these murky legal zones because there wasn’t a single nationwide law that straight-up called “organized crime” what it was—a monster all on its own. Imagine these brutal gangs pulling off extortion schemes, smuggling operations, or even assassinations right out in the open. The old IPC could pin them down for individual crimes, like murder under section 302 or extortion under 383, but it never tied it all together as this interconnected, money-hungry machine. That scattered approach left cops and judges piecing things together like a jigsaw puzzle, and way too often, the big bosses just slithered away through the gaps.
Pioneering Efforts from the States It all really heated up in Maharashtra back in the ’90s, where the underworld was like something out of a Bollywood thriller—gang wars, flashy hits, you name it. The IPC’s weaknesses were glaring, so in 1999, they launched the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA). This was a no-nonsense law that finally nailed down organized crime as these ongoing illegal activities by groups chasing cash or clout, what they called “continuing unlawful activities” (CULA) strung out over time. MCOCA gave the police some serious firepower: wiretapping, freezing assets, and even letting confessions stick against the top dogs, not just the small fry. They set up special courts to speed things along too. Delhi jumped on board in 2002 when their crime wave got out of hand, and then states like Gujarat in 2004, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh cooked up their own twists on it. But here’s the rub—it was still this uneven patchwork, leaving huge chunks of the country wide open.
National Laws That Helped, But Not Enough On the national front, there were bits and pieces chipping away at the issue, but nothing that went all-in. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), which started in 1967 and got tougher over the years, zeroed in on terror groups and shady organizations, letting the government outlaw them and grab their stuff—super useful when mafias crossed paths with terrorists. Then you’ve got the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) from 1985, aimed at drug lords, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in 2002 to strangle their dirty money, and even the Arms Act for the weapon smugglers. These laws threw in extras like holding people preventively or seizing property, which was a godsend. But they were all skirting around the heart of it—no dedicated crime for syndicates meant no full-on, coordinated takedown.
The Real Grind on the Ground Putting it into action was a total slog. Without consistent definitions across the board, cases would fall apart on dumb technicalities, evidence rules tilted toward the bad guys, and these networks just played the system by hopping state lines. Down in Mumbai’s rough streets or the wild spots in UP, those MCOCA units racked up some solid victories, like locking up kingpins with recorded confessions. But nationwide? It was like a bad game of hot potato with jurisdictions, letting the leaders bolt to places with softer laws. Throw in corruption, short-staffed investigations, and witnesses getting silenced for good, and you can see why everyone was screaming for a total national revamp. It was high time.
How do the jurisdictional conflicts that have arisen between the central and state laws on Organized crime
The old (and now obsolete) IPC made addressing organized crime a problem that resembled trying to herd a bunch of wild cats that kept moving between state boundaries. Prior to the new criminal code for India (the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)), which will be implemented on July 1, 2024, organized crime was often dealt with locally and through a tangled mess of state and federal regulations, without any true national regulation supporting them. Crime rings could be prosecuted for discrete criminal acts, such as murder (IPC Section 302) and extortion (Section 383), but due to their illegal businesses spanning several states, jurisdictional conflicts among law enforcement agencies made investigations living nightmares.
MCOCA: The State-Level Heavy Hitter
Take Maharashtra’s Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) from 1999—it was born out of the chaotic underworld scene in the ’90s and later extended to Delhi in 2002. It basically defined organized crime as groups pulling off two or more serious illegal acts (like extortion involving violence or death) within a 10-year span. This law packed a punch: death penalty or life in prison for murders tied to it, 5 years to life for other crimes, plus seizing their assets, allowing wiretaps (with approval from a Deputy Inspector General), making confessions usable against the bosses, and setting up special courts to speed through trials (check out Sections 3-6 and 14).
Other states jumped on the bandwagon—Gujarat in 2004, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, and more—creating their own versions to take down local kingpins. These worked okay for nailing gangs within one state, but fell flat when the criminals hopped borders.
UAPA: The main legislation against Terrorism and their affiliates
The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), enacted in 1967, underwent major changes after the 2008 Mumbai Attacks. The UAPA’s main purpose was to prosecute anyone who is involved in or assists in carrying out or facilitating terrorism through organized crime. Organized crime syndicates utilize money derived from illegal activities to finance or support terrorist organizations. The UAPA allows for the prosecution of these individuals as “unlawful associations” and provides for severe penalties, including up to one year of preventative detention; loss of assets; life imprisonment and, in certain instances the death penalty; and specific bail provisions where the burden of proving innocent rests with the accused. The UAPA has revolutionized the manner in which the criminal justice system approaches cases involving organized crime and terrorism, and has enabled law enforcement authorities to pursue the prosecution of individuals providing financing to organizations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and its associates. However, the UAPA does not cover all forms of organized crime, particularly those focused on generating revenue that does not provide funding to organizations.
Other Sourceful Legislation to Guide Efforts
In addition to the laws mentioned above, there have been several other legislative efforts used to attempt to fix some of the problems that were caused by the disconnection between drug cartels and money laundering. For example, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (1985) was created as a means of regulating drug cartels; the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was created to investigate and prosecute people who engage in money laundering actions; and the Arms Act, which was created to restrict illegal firearms. These laws were useful for resolving specific issues, but they could not address the overall problem of the proliferation of organized crime groups.
Major Problems with Fragmentation
The MCOCA laws created a fragmented legal system throughout India that lacked a cohesive definition of “organized crime,” leading to serious gaps in prosecuting organized crime groups in states without their own MCOCA.
The MCOCA laws have resulted in a large number of failed prosecutions and a significant percentage of traffic violators (over 95%) being acquitted of all charges due to the lack of a standard definition of organized crime. The situation in Delhi is indicative of the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in prosecuting organized crime cases; by 2016, only one of the 57 MCOCA cases that were prosecuted was successfully resolved through prosecution. The application of multiple charges (e.g., MCOCA and PMLA for the same crime) may also result in multiple convictions for the same crime, which most courts cannot process due to limited resources, witness intimidation, and corruption. Consequently, the duplication of prosecution can create multiple sources of litigation, causing extended delays in judicial proceedings.
The Jurisdiction Mess That Let Gangs Slip Through
The real killer was when crimes crossed state lines—like gangs in the National Capital Region (NCR) planning in Uttar Pradesh, pulling off hits in Delhi, and hiding out in Haryana. Figuring out which police force or court handled it was a nightmare because “law and order” is a state responsibility (per the Constitution’s List II), but central laws like UAPA brought in federal agencies like the CBI or NIA. The Supreme Court highlighted this in some 2025 NCR cases: criminals played the “jurisdictional issues” card, bouncing investigations between states and delaying everything while agencies fought over who was in charge. No one had overall command, so that big bosses could just disappear.
The NIA Act allowed takeovers for multi-state cases, but turf battles kept happening—states complained about central interference, while the feds griped about weak local policing. This loophole of gangs border-hopping was crying out for a nationwide solution, which is where the BNS finally stepped in.
For example Mahesh Khatri @ Bholi v. State NCT of Delhi (2025)
The Facts
Gangster Mahesh Khatri, better known as Bholi, was a real tough customer with more than a dozen cases piled up against him since 2013. We’re talking serious stuff like attempted murder, extortion, and running organized crime rackets. His First Information Reports (FIRs) were all over the place—scattered across Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana in the National Capital Region (NCR). His gang’s operations were slick: they’d plan things out in UP, carry out the hits or whatever in Delhi, and then duck and hide in Haryana. By late 2025, those old 2013 cases were still dragging on, unresolved after a whopping 12 years, all while Delhi’s courts were buried under 288 pending organized crime trials.
The Jurisdictional Mess
The Supreme Court, with Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on the bench, called out the total chaos in the system. Crimes would happen in one state (let’s call it “State A”), but the investigations and trials would get bounced around to “State B” or wherever. It pitted state-level powers under laws like MCOCA against central agencies claiming turf under NIA or UAPA. There was zero clarity on who was the lead agency or which court should handle it, which meant investigations stalled out, and bad guys exploited delays to get bail or drag things on forever.
Why It Matters
This case perfectly sums up the massive flaws in the old patchwork system before the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) came along. The court basically pushed for something like an NCR-wide version of MCOCA or using the NIA Act to step in for cases with multiple FIRs across states. It shone a light on how these border confusions let criminal syndicates keep operating without a hitch—those 288 delays in the NCR were a glaring example of why India desperately needed a unified national approach, like what’s now in BNS Section 111.
H2: Organized Crime under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
So, let’s talk about this new law in India called the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, or BNS for short, which came out in 2023. It basically shakes things up by straight-up defining organized crime as its own thing under Section 111. That’s a real shift from the ancient Indian Penal Code from way back in 1860, which never had a dedicated spot for stuff like this.
What it’s targeting are these ongoing shady operations run by people or whole groups—think kidnappings, extortion rackets, cyber hacks, human trafficking, you name it. They usually involve some muscle, like violence or threats, all to squeeze out cash or other perks.
The Big Change in the Law
The whole point of BNS was to ditch those old British-era rules and bring in something modern. One of the coolest updates is making organized crime a standalone offense that covers the entire country, instead of piecing together random bits from the IPC, like that conspiracy section 120A.
It officially started on July 1, 2024, and it’s kind of modeled after laws in places like Maharashtra with their MCOCA, but now it’s uniform—no more patchwork from state to state. The punishments? Pretty severe: you’re looking at anywhere from five years behind bars to life in prison, and if someone ends up dead because of it, it could even mean the death penalty. Oh, and fines could hit up to 10 lakh rupees.
Why Bother Making It Separate?
It tackles all sorts of crap that screws with the economy, from massive frauds and land grabs to trafficking rings, which helps make everyone feel a bit safer and draws in more investors who aren’t scared off. Plus, with solid definitions for what makes a syndicate or a “continuing activity,” BNS hands law enforcement the real tools they need to smash these slick criminal outfits. It’s like finally closing a huge loophole in how we handle the big bad guys.
H2: Organized Crime in BNS vs IPC – A Comparative Overview
For over a century, the law tackled organized crime the way a person might try to dismantle a fortress by collecting a few loose bricks. Under the old Indian Penal Code (IPC), each crime—extortion, violence, a threat—was treated as a separate, broken brick. The system could convict someone for that single act, but it couldn’t truly see, or effectively demolish, the powerful fortress of the criminal enterprise itself. It was a constant game of catch-up, a frustrating chase of a shadow.
The new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) changes that entire game. It steps back, points at the entire formidable structure, and gives it a name: organized crime. The law now recognizes the architecture of intimidation—the continuing business of fear run by a syndicate for profit. This is a profound shift in vision.
The current legislation reflects how our understanding of this issue has evolved over time. With the passage of this law, we are finally able to use the law to protect ourselves from not only crime but also from the large, unknown entities that use crime as a tool against us.
The Use of Organized Crime by the BNS as a Tool of Attack Against Mafia Network
No law has ever been a sufficient basis for a criminal organization, but rather the function of that law in relation to an organization has been the greater influence. An example of this is how under the Indian Penal Code, criminal acts were largely treated as individual acts of crime, such as one instance of extortion and one instance of cheating. Even though individual offenders were punished, the greater criminal organization continued to thrive. For every offender that was captured another would take their place, and so on and so forth.
A component of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita seeks to address this function of law, and specifically Section 111 of the Act that does this makes the shift from individual offenders to the criminal organization as a whole. Organized criminal activity is not a random occurrence but rather planned, multiple occurrences and occurs through the efforts and planning of various individuals working in concert with one another to produce a greater entity. Because of this, the Act seeks to punish not only the offenders, but those who assist them and plan for the operation of the organization. Simply being an active member of an Organized crime syndicate means that a person could receive imprisonment for five years to life upon conviction. Those who assist, plan or give sanctuary to offenders are held to the same level of punishment as the actual perpetrators of the crime.
The BNS has significantly changed how it utilises the concept of continuity when assessing an Organized crime group. Organized crime is seen as a complex series of unlawful acts (including but not limited to land grabbing, extortion and cyber fraud) that takes place over time (often for many years) by way of violence, threats or intimidation against a number of victims. This means that multiple instances of land grabbing, a single incident of extortion, and multiple instances of cyber fraud can be linked together and treated as part of one continuous operation, rather than being viewed as separate offences.
The law identifies profit and control to be the two primary factors motivating mafia type criminal enterprises. Additionally, crimes committed for financial profit (and in relation to those profits the law has specific provisions for penalties/excuses) and unexplained wealth associated with financial crimes are now covered under Section 111 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The introduction of substantial financial penalties for committing a financial crime is now included in Canada’s Criminal Code. In some instances where the commission of an Organized crime results in a death, the potential penalty is death.
Overall, the BNS is beginning to provide a clearer understanding of how Organized crime operates and focuses on practical ways to eliminate Organized crime in the future the legislative framework provides a more nuanced understanding of how to prevent Organized crime networks from evolving into a greater threat to society. Rather than simply reacting after the fact, the new framework will attempt to attack “criminal enterprises” at their roots before they reach maturity and/or cause irreparable damage to society.
Conclusion – Organized Crime in BNS
In Section 111 of the Bharat Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), we learn how organized crime cannot only be defined, but prosecuted.
Prior to the enactment of this provision within the BNS, there was a void within India’s criminal law framework for an accurate definition of Organized Crime along with its punishment. With the introduction of Section 111, organized crime, and its associated offenses, are now defined within India and can be prosecuted under the BNS’s Criminal Justice System with rigorous punishment (Life Imprisonment/Death Penalty) for any person or persons injured (killed) as a result of this organization’s commission(s) of any or all of the offenses listed above (fines up to and including five lakh Rupees). This Section further provides law enforcement authorities the ability to restrict and/or prevent the class of offenses that are the product of Organized Crime Syndicates (i.e., online extortion schemes, cybercrimes, human trafficking) from being committed. Ultimately, the effectiveness of the BNS will depend on the fair application of all law enforcement policies and practices without any abuses, and the effectiveness of the
Judiciary to limit and/or control the future criminal activities of all offenders while maintaining the civil liberties of all individuals.
FAQs Regarding Organized Crime under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
1. Definition of Organized Crime as Per Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Organized Crime is defined in Section 111 of the BNS. Organized crime mainly deals with any ongoing illegal activity such as the following – kidnapping, robbery, extortion, illegal land acquisition, contract killing, economic scams, cybercrime & trafficking in humans, drugs, firearms and other illegal goods etc. In most cases, organized crime is committed by individuals or groups of people, either working alone or together as part of a syndicate, using force, threat, intimidation, coercion and similar methods to gain financial benefits (directly or indirectly). In brief, organized crime refers to the commission of serious crimes (which are cognizable) by groups of two or more persons (2 or more) so as to obtain financial benefits.
2. What is the Difference Between the BNS and the IPC regarding Organized Crime?
Organized crime was not addressed in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which meant that in the absence of organized crime sections as part of the IPC, it was the responsibility of state-specific legislation (for example the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA)) to tackle organized crime. The BNS has established a framework to address the issues associated with organized crime, as defined in Section 111 of the BNS, on a nationwide basis. Furthermore, the BNS shows recognition of modern issues associated with organized crime such as cybercrimes and the financial fraud. The BNS also greatly increases the penalties for engaging in organized crime from heavy fines and prison terms to life imprisonment for the most serious offenses.
3. Can all members of a crime syndicate be punished under BNS?
Punished with imprisonment ranging from five years to life and fines of at least five lakh rupees. This extends to anyone who carries out such crimes, as well as anyone who encourages, conspires to commit, helps prepare for, or provides a safe haven for someone who commits these crimes, all of whom can face three years to a life sentence.
The law leaves no room for Organized crime syndicates to escape from accountability through their chain of command; any participant in their illegal activity is treated liable for the entire crime, regardless of their level of actual participation.
4. Is Organized Crime Under BNS A Deterrent Against Mafia Networks?
The BNS has acted as a major deterrent against Organized crime through harsher penalties that only apply to mafia-style crime syndicates, including life-in-prison terms and seizure of assets, along with fast-track methods for disrupting and breaking down financing and operational infrastructure for these organisations. By making all members of a criminal grouping criminally liable for their actions, the BNS sends a strong message to the public that we will have zero tolerance for criminal activity by Organized crime syndicates and that they will pay a substantial price for what they do. Revised laws targeting all aspects of Organized crime—far more severe than individual acts—will create more public safety, as well as ensure that members of Organized crime syndicates do not continue to commit new offences, because they see no disadvantage from continuing their criminal lifestyle. Recent arrests in Punjab and Delhi indicate that the BNS has had an immediate impact on disrupting Organized crime syndicates, although vigilance over time will be necessary to continue successfully counteracting them.
About Author
Shalini Kumari is a first-year law student at the NMIMS School of Law, Navi Mumbai. She has shown consistent academic engagement through active involvement in legal research, drafting, and analytical writing across diverse areas of law. Shalini has participated in law school academic initiatives, research-based projects, and writing platforms, gaining exposure to both theoretical and practical dimensions of legal study. Her work reflects clarity of thought, structured legal analysis, and a growing commitment to understanding law in its institutional, social, and practical contexts. She aspires to build a strong academic foundation while contributing meaningfully to legal scholarship and discourse.