Section 319 BNSS: When attendance of witness may be dispensed with and commission issued (Formerly Section 284 CrPC)

Section 319 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: When attendance of witness may be dispensed with and commission issued

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) Whenever, in the course of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita, it appears to a Court or Magistrate that the examination of a witness is necessary for the ends of justice, and that the attendance of such witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable, the Court or Magistrate may dispense with such attendance and may issue a commission for the examination of the witness in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter:

Provided that where the examination of the President or the Vice-President of India or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory as a witness is necessary for the ends of justice, a commission shall be issued for the examination of such a witness.

(2) The Court may, when issuing a commission for the examination of a witness for the prosecution, direct that such amount as the Court considers reasonable to meet the expenses of the accused, including the advocate's fees, be paid by the prosecution.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Inquiry Sec 2(1)(g) Investigation Sec 2(1)(h) Victim Sec 2(1)(w)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 319

Section 319 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 284 of the CrPC, 1973) governs when the personal attendance of a witness may be dispensed with and a commission issued for their examination.

Statutory Conditions for Commission: Issued when the attendance of a witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense, or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable.
Judicial Necessity Test: The Court must satisfy itself that the examination of the witness is necessary for the ends of justice.
Protection of Key Witnesses: Often applied to infirm, elderly, or internationally residing expert/medical witnesses, and public officials.

Key Landmark Precedents:

State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai, (2003) 4 SCC 601: The Supreme Court held that video conferencing can be utilized as a contemporary, expeditious form of commission under Section 284 CrPC (Section 319 BNSS), eliminating unreasonable expense and delay.
Dharmanand Pant v. State of U.P., AIR 1957 SC 594: Held that commissions must not be issued casually if direct visual examination and cross-examination are crucial to test witness veracity.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When a key defence witness resides abroad or is medically incapacitated from traveling, file an application under Section 319 praying for examination via commission through live video link.