Section 432 BNSS: Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken (Formerly Section 391 CrPC)

Section 432 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) In dealing with any appeal under this Chapter, the Appellate Court, if it thinks additional evidence to be necessary, shall record its reasons and may either take such evidence itself, or direct it to be taken by a Magistrate or, when the Appellate Court is a High Court, by a Court of Session or a Magistrate.

(2) When the additional evidence is taken by the Court of Session or the Magistrate, it or he shall certify such evidence to the Appellate Court, and such Court shall thereupon proceed to dispose of the appeal.

(3) The accused or his advocate shall have the right to be present when the additional evidence is taken.

(4) The taking of evidence under this section shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter XXV, as if it were an inquiry.

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) Arrest Sec 35

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 432

Section 432 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 391 of the CrPC, 1973) authorizes the Appellate Court to take further evidence itself or direct it to be taken by a Magistrate or Court of Session where additional evidence is necessary.

Necessity for Additional Evidence: If the Appellate Court thinks additional evidence is necessary, it shall record its reasons and may either take such evidence itself or direct it to be taken by a Magistrate or Court of Session.
Accused's Presence Mandatory: Unless the Appellate Court directs otherwise, the accused or their advocate shall have the right to be present when additional evidence is taken.
Strict Exception to Finality: Cannot be used to fill up prosecution lacunae or repair defective investigations, but only to prevent failure of justice where evidence was wrongly excluded.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Rajeswar Prasad Misra v. State of W.B., AIR 1965 SC 1887: The Supreme Court held that the power under Section 391 CrPC (Section 432 BNSS) is discretionary and should be exercised only where additional evidence is necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice, not to fill up gaps.
Rambhau v. State of Maharashtra, (2001) 4 SCC 759: Reaffirmed that an appellate court will not permit additional evidence if the party had full opportunity during trial but remained negligent.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If vital exculpatory documents (such as alibi electronic records, unexamined forensic certificates) were wrongfully rejected by the trial court, file an application under Section 432 at the appellate stage demonstrating clear relevance.