Section 327 BNSS: Identification report of Magistrate (Formerly Section 291A CrPC)

Section 327 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Identification report of Magistrate

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) Any document purporting to be a report of identification under the hand of an Executive Magistrate in respect of a person or property may be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita, although such Magistrate is not called as a witness:

Provided that where such report contains a statement of any suspect or witness to which the provisions of section 19, section 26, section 27, section 158 or section 160 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, apply, such statement shall not be used under this sub-section except in accordance with the provisions of those sections.

(2) The Court may, if it thinks fit, and shall, on the application of the prosecution or of the accused, summon and examine such Magistrate as to the subject-matter of the said report.

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 327

Section 327 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 291A of the CrPC, 1973) establishes that an identification report prepared by an Executive Magistrate during a Test Identification Parade (TIP) may be used as evidence without calling the Magistrate, subject to court summons.

Admissibility of TIP Report: Any document purporting to be a report of identification of persons or property signed by an Executive Magistrate may be used as evidence in any inquiry or trial.
Dispensing with Magistrate's Oral Testimony: The Executive Magistrate who conducted the TIP need not be summoned as a routine witness unless specifically ordered.
Right to Summon for Cross-examination: The Court may, and shall on the application of prosecution or accused, summon and examine the Magistrate as to the subject-matter of the identification report.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Pramod Mandal v. State of Bihar, (2004) 13 SCC 606: The Supreme Court highlighted that while TIP reports are admissible, testing whether the suspects were shown to witnesses before the parade requires summoning the Magistrate under Section 291A CrPC (Section 327 BNSS).
Raju v. State of Maharashtra, (2020) 10 SCC 431: Reaffirmed that TIP is a corroborative investigative tool; substantive identification occurs in the courtroom witness box.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Always file an application under Section 327(2) to summon the Executive Magistrate if the TIP memo reveals procedural flaws such as lack of similar-looking dummies, failure to record suspect objections, or delay in holding the parade.