Short answer: the mapping spine is mechanically extracted from two BPR&D correspondence tables, checked for structural gaps, and kept separate from every hand-written note.
Mechanical extraction reduces transcription error. It does not turn a training reference into law, and it does not prove that two provisions are identical.
1. The source is identified, dated and limited
The IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS tools use correspondence tables published by the Bureau of Police Research and Development. Each tool links to its source and records the source date as 21 June 2024. The tables are police training aids. They are not statutes, court judgments or independent legal opinions.
That distinction is visible on the tool pages because a useful reference can still have a limited legal status. For any filing or advice, the current bare act and the facts of the matter remain controlling.
2. The comparison prose is deliberately excluded
The source PDFs contain section numbers, section subjects, old-code references and a separate summary-of-comparison column. AdvocEasy uses the first three factual fields. It does not copy the summary prose.
This is enforced in the parser, not left to editorial memory. Each PDF has its own measured column boundaries. Text at or beyond the comparison column is discarded before a row is assembled. The repeated copyright footer is also excluded by its page position.
Read
Section, subject and old reference columns.
Reject
Comparison prose and page footers.
Emit
A factual mapping spine with provenance.
3. Rows are rebuilt from coordinates, not copied as paragraphs
PDF text is not stored like a spreadsheet. Words that look aligned can sit on slightly different baselines, and a single section reference can wrap across lines. The extractor reads text fragments with their page coordinates, groups them into the permitted columns, and clusters baselines that are within two points of one another.
The parser then rejoins wrapped references, preserves multi-section mappings, skips labelled explanation blocks that are not sections, and normalises limited layout artifacts such as extra spaces around brackets. It does not invent a missing mapping.
4. The build fails when the structure looks incomplete
Before generated data is written, the extractor checks the complete top-level sequence. BNSS must cover sections 1 through 531, and BNS must cover sections 1 through 358. A missing number or an unexpected highest section stops the build.
Tests also cover malformed references, duplicate rows, merged references, known wrapping problems, source typos that are safe to repair, and phrases that must never appear because they belong to the excluded comparison column. These checks catch parsing failures. They do not replace legal review.
5. Generated facts and original notes cannot overwrite each other
The extractor writes only files ending in .generated.ts. Original explanations live in separate notes files. Regenerating the source spine cannot delete or rewrite those notes.
When the two layers are combined, a note must point to an existing row. Duplicate note identifiers and orphaned notes throw an error. This prevents a source change from silently detaching reviewed work.
6. Every row carries a provenance label
A transcribed section heading and a legal conclusion are different claims. The data model keeps them separate. A row can be marked machine matched, official concordance, advocate verified or sources disagree. The change type can also remain not yet reviewed when the permitted source fields do not establish whether text was substantively amended.
A correspondence is a route to the provision, not a conclusion about what the provision means. Read the applicable bare act and check transitional issues before relying on a section.
7. What readers can inspect
Both public converters show the source, source date, row count, review badge and any original note or conflict. The broader publication rules are set out in the Editorial and Legal Review Policy.
Correction or source update? Email support@advoceasy.in with the tool, section reference and source you believe should be checked.