Section 389 BNSS: Summary procedure for punishment for non-attendance by a witness in obedience to summons (Formerly Section 350 CrPC)

Section 389 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Summary procedure for punishment for non-attendance by a witness in obedience to summons

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) If any witness being summoned to appear before a Criminal Court is legally bound to appear at a certain place and time in obedience to the summons and without just excuse neglects or refuses to attend at that place or time or departs from the place where he has to attend before the time at which it is lawful for him to depart, and the Court before which the witness is to appear is satisfied that it is expedient in the interests of justice that such a witness should be tried summarily, the Court may take cognizance of the offence and after giving the offender an opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished under this section, sentence him to fine not exceeding five hundred rupees.

(2) In every such case the Court shall follow, as nearly as may be practicable, the procedure prescribed for summary trials.

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 389

Section 389 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 350 of the CrPC, 1973) establishes a summary procedure for the punishment of a witness who fails to attend court in obedience to a summons without just excuse.

Failure to Obey Summons: Triggered where any witness summoned to attend neglects or refuses to attend, or departs from the court without lawful excuse.
Summary Magisterial Cognizance: Court of Session or Magistrate takes summary cognizance and affords a reasonable opportunity of showing cause.
Fine Penalty: The Court may sentence the defaulter to fine not exceeding five hundred rupees, recoverable as a criminal fine.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Ram Narain v. State of U.P., AIR 1973 SC 2204: The Supreme Court held that summary punishment for non-attendance cannot be imposed without giving the witness an effective opportunity to explain their absence due to illness or unavoidable circumstance.
P.K. Ghosh v. J.G. Rajput, (1995) 6 SCC 744: Affirmed that judicial discretion must distinguish between contumacious defiance and genuine logistical impediment.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If a client or witness receives a Section 389 show-cause notice, reply promptly annexing certified medical certificates, train/flight delay records, or proof of family emergency to establish 'just excuse' for non-appearance.