Section 352 BNSS: Oral arguments and memorandum of arguments (Formerly Section 314 CrPC)

Section 352 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Oral arguments and memorandum of arguments

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) Any party to a proceeding may, as soon as may be, after the close of his evidence, address concise oral arguments, and may, before he concludes the oral arguments, if any, submit a memorandum to the Court setting forth concisely and under distinct headings, the arguments in support of his case and every such memorandum shall form part of the record.

(2) A copy of every such memorandum shall be simultaneously furnished to the opposite party.

(3) No adjournment of the proceedings shall be granted for the purpose of filing the written arguments unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, considers it necessary to grant such adjournment.

(4) The Court may, if it is of opinion that the oral arguments are not concise or relevant, regulate such arguments.

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 352

Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regulates the submission of oral arguments and concise written memorandums of arguments.

Evidentiary Proof & Admissibility: Section 352 provides that any party to a proceeding may, as soon as may be after the close of his evidence, address concise oral arguments, and may, before he concludes the oral arguments, if any, submit a memorandum to the Court setting forth concisely and under distinct headings the arguments in support of his case.
Core Legal Standard: A copy of every such memorandum shall be furnished to the opposite party.

Sub-section (4) permits the Court to fix a time limit for oral arguments if it considers them unreasonably prolonged.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Mohd. Hussain v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (2012) 2 SCC 584: The Supreme Court held that written arguments supplement oral submissions but cannot replace an effective oral hearing; the right to be heard orally through counsel is fundamental to fair trial under Article 21.
Babu v. State of U.P. (1983) 2 SCC 21: Affirmed that courts must consider both oral and written submissions carefully before reaching a final verdict.

Legal Commentary:

Section 352 formalizes written advocacy. A well-indexed Section 352 memorandum citing specific paragraph numbers of witness depositions and statutory precedents assists the trial judge in drafting a legally sound judgment and forms an invaluable record for appeal.