Section 479, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Served half.
Still inside.
The law says the jail must apply for their release. HalfTime reads the court papers, finds who has crossed the line, and shows its working.
S01 · constructed sample · names masked
न्यायालय अपर सत्र न्यायाधीश, कोर्ट संख्या 5, आगरा र— कु— पुत्र रा— स— ........ प्रार्थी/अभियुक्त मु.अ.सं. 87/2023, अन्तर्गत धारा 379, 411 भा.द.वि., थाना सुजानपुर, जनपद आगरा यह द्वितीय जमानत प्रार्थना पत्र प्रार्थी/अभियुक्त र— कु— की ओर से उपरोक्त मुकदमे में जमानत पर रिहा किये जाने हेतु प्रस्तुत किया गया है।
Days in custody
IPC 1860 s.379 + IPC 1860 s.411 · line crossed 14 Mar 2024 · 0 days ago
A model reads Hindi or English papers and quotes its sources. Code checks every quote and applies the law. A lawyer signs.
The law already says go home.
Under Section 479 of the BNSS, an undertrial who has spent half the maximum sentence for the offence in custody is to be released on bail. A first-time offender, after one-third.
Section 479(3) puts the duty on the jail: the superintendent must apply to the court. Nobody has to ask.
The jail's own register often doesn't say which sections still stand or when custody began. That is written in the court papers, in Hindi, in scans, across thousands of files.
- undertrials in India's prisons, 72.6% of all prisoners
- 3,71,440 NCRB, Prison Statistics India 2024 (as reported by Daily Excelsior)
- people identified under Section 479 in all of 2024
- 968 NCRB, Prison Statistics India 2024, Table 7.4 (as cited in a Research Square preprint)
- applications actually filed
- 467 NCRB, Prison Statistics India 2024, Table 7.4 (as cited in a Research Square preprint)
The ledger of days
Every day inside is written down somewhere.
IPC 1860 s.379 carries at most 3 years. The papers say first-time offender, so one-third of that is the line. Scroll to count the days दी— कु— has served since 20 May 2024.
Days served
Line at day 365 · 20 May 2025
S02 · constructed sample
दी— कु— पुत्र ज— मौ— ........ प्रार्थी/अभियुक्त मु.अ.सं. 214/2024, अन्तर्गत धारा 379 भा.द.वि., थाना नयागांव, जनपद कानपुर नगर यह द्वितीय जमानत प्रार्थना पत्र प्रार्थी/अभियुक्त दी— कु— की ओर से उपरोक्त मुकदमे में जमानत पर रिहा किये जाने हेतु प्रस्तुत किया गया है। संक्षेप में अभियोजन कथानक इस प्रकार है कि दिनांक 17 मई 2024 को वादी आ— ति— की किराना दुकान के गल्ले से नकदी रुपये 18,500/- की चोरी हो गई। दुकान के सी.सी.टी.वी. फुटेज के आधार पर प्रार्थी/अभियुक्त की पहचान की गई। इस संबंध में दिनांक 18 मई 2024 को थाना नयागांव पर प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट पंजीकृत की गई।
One sweep. Every person sorted by the law.
Give it a jail's papers. It reads each one and files the person into one of four drawers, with the reason written on the card.
Counts from the 12 constructed sample orders, as of 13 Nov 2026.
Run the sample sweepSame papers. Same model. One of them shows its working.
A plain chatbot, asked “is he eligible under 479?”
Yes, on the facts in the order, the accused appears eligible for release under Section 479 BNSS. The offences are Sections 379 and 411 IPC, each punishable with at most 3 years' imprisonment, and neither carries death or life imprisonment, so the Section 479 bar does not apply. The order records that he has no criminal history, which makes him a first-time offender, so he qualifies after serving one-third of the maximum sentence, i.e. 1 year. He has been in custody since 14.03.2023, so he crossed that threshold on 14.03.2024. Even the general half-term threshold of 1.5 years was crossed on 14.09.2024. Because BNSS took effect only on 01.07.2024, his entitlement strictly arises from 01.07.2024. The Supreme Court has held that Section 479 applies to all undertrial prisoners in pending cases, whenever the offence was registered. By the order date of 28.10.2026 he had been in custody for over 3 years 7 months, longer than the maximum 3-year sentence for either offence. The order does not mention Section 479 at all and rejects bail only on the "gravity of the offence", which looks like an oversight. This assumes he has no other pending cases against him and that he caused no delay in the trial that would be excluded from the computation, and the order records neither. Subject to that, he should be released on his personal bond, with the jail superintendent or the court acting on it, and a fresh application invoking Section 479 should be filed.
Says: eligible. Misses Sec 479(2).
HalfTime, on the same order
- IPC 1860 s.379 (Punishment for theft) → max 3 years
- IPC 1860 s.411 (Dishonestly receiving stolen property) → max 3 years
- Case from before 1 Jul 2024: Sec 479 BNSS still applies, per the Supreme Court order of 23 Aug 2024. Old Sec 436A CrPC (half line, no first-time benefit) shown for comparison.
- Longest maximum among the charges: 3 years (IPC 1860 s.379).
- First-time offender (per the papers): one-third of 3 years.
- Custody began 14 Mar 2023.
- Line: 14 Mar 2024.
- Today: 13 Nov 2026; 1340 days detained.
- Detention has reached the full maximum term.
Measured, with the misses.
The number that matters most: how often it says someone is past the line when they are not. That error sends a lawyer chasing a wrong application; HalfTime would rather say “can't tell”.
Evaluation report not generated yet.
The model proposes. Code disposes.
- Step 1
Read
Hindi or English, typed or scanned. Text-layer PDFs are read in the browser; scanned pages are transcribed by Claude.
- Step 2
Quote
Claude pulls out the charged sections, the custody date, first-time status and other cases. Each with the exact sentence it came from.
- Step 3
Check
Code looks for every quote in the papers. A quote that isn't there, or doesn't contain the date or section claimed, is thrown out.
- Step 4
Apply
A tested rules engine applies Section 479 to the checked facts and writes out every step. Then it drafts the 479(3) application for a lawyer.
The model never decides who is eligible. If it is wrong about a fact, the quote check usually catches it; if it is missing a fact, the case goes to “can't tell” for a person to look at.
What it can't do
- It doesn't release anyone. It finds people and drafts paperwork; a court decides.
- It reads only what the papers say. Days lost to adjournments sought by the accused must be entered by a person.
- Sec 479(2) is read differently by different courts. Multi-offence cases are flagged for a lawyer, never decided.
- State excise laws, the Gangsters Act and some special-act limbs are marked “can't tell” until a lawyer enters the maximum.
- The proof on this site uses constructed orders. The real-order evaluation runs as soon as the held-out dataset is available.
Run a sweep on the sample jail, or bring your own papers.