Section 335 BNSS: Record of evidence in absence of accused (Formerly Section 299 CrPC)

Section 335 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Record of evidence in absence of accused

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) If it is proved that an accused person has absconded, and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, the Court competent to try, or commit for trial, such person for the offence complained of may, in his absence, examine the witnesses (if any) produced on behalf of the prosecution, and record their depositions and any such deposition may, on the arrest of such person, be given in evidence against him on the inquiry into, or trial for, the offence with which he is charged, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or cannot be found or his presence cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable.

(2) If it appears that an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life has been committed by some person or persons unknown, the High Court or the Sessions Judge may direct that any Magistrate of the first class shall hold an inquiry and examine any witnesses who can give evidence concerning the offence and any depositions so taken may be given in evidence against any person who is subsequently accused of the offence, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or beyond the limits of India.

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 335

Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 299 of the CrPC, 1973) provides for recording evidence in the absence of an absconding accused and its subsequent admissibility upon arrest.

Abscondence Finding Prerequisite: It must be proved that the accused has absconded and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting them.
Deposition in Absence: The Court may, in the accused's absence, examine any witnesses produced on behalf of the prosecution and record their depositions.
Admissibility upon Arrest: Such deposition may be given in evidence against the accused upon their arrest if the deponent is dead, incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be found without unreasonable delay or expense.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Nirmal Singh v. State of Haryana, (2000) 4 SCC 41: The Supreme Court held that Section 299 CrPC (Section 335 BNSS) is an exception to the principle of recording evidence in the presence of the accused; strict proof of abscondence is an indispensable condition precedent.
Jayendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 7 SCC 104: Affirmed that if the trial court fails to record a specific finding that the accused has absconded, evidence recorded in their absence cannot be used against them upon subsequent arrest.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When representing a client arrested years after proceedings under Section 335, scrutinize whether the Magistrate passed a formal judicial order declaring abscondence before recording depositions; in its absence, object to reading those statements.