Entering upon defence
Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with entering upon defence. Where the accused is not acquitted under section 255, he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Where the accused is not acquitted under section 255, he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof.
(2) If the accused puts in any written statement, the Judge shall file it with the record.
(3) If the accused applies for the issue of any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or thing, the Judge shall issue such process unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded, that such application should be refused on the ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice.
Section 256, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 233 Entering upon defence Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
State of Punjab vs Hari Singh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 233, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where an accused is charged with possession of narcotic articles under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, conscious possession - meaning awareness of the nature of the article coupled with a deliberate or intended state of mind - is an essential legal requirement. In the absence of questioning the accused under Section 313 CrPC regarding this vital element of the prosecution case, the trial suffers from a serious procedural infirmity that cannot be cured by circumstantial evidence of physical possession alone, and the conviction must be set aside as violating the fundamental principles of natural justice and fair trial.
On this section: Section 233 allows accused in Sessions trials to file written statements.
-
Patel Rameshore Baburao vs The State of Manipur
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 233, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused person kills his spouse upon discovering her infidelity, and such discovery causes grave and sudden provocation leading to loss of self-control, the offense falls within Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC, reducing the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC. The mental element required is knowledge that the act is likely to cause death, not intention to cause death. The absence of premeditation and the sudden nature of the act in response to grave provocation are significant factors in determining the appropriate conviction and sentence.
On this section: Procedure after prosecution evidence; cited in the context of whether the trial court should have called upon the accused to enter on his defense
-
Dr. Padamsinha B. Patil vs Central Bureau of Investigation
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 233, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the right of an accused to examine defence witnesses is fundamental and ordinarily cannot be curtailed, the court has discretion under Section 233(3) of the CrPC to refuse such applications if made for vexation, delay, or defeating ends of justice. However, this discretion must be exercised judicially. The court cannot reject defence witnesses merely on grounds of delay when the prosecution has taken years to examine its witnesses. Critically, if the prosecution does not examine witnesses whose statements were recorded during investigation under Section 161 of the CrPC, and the defence alleges these witnesses were deliberately withheld, the accused cannot be deprived of the opportunity to examine them in defence, provided such witnesses have potential to throw light on the occurrence. The relevancy of evidence must be determined by whether it bears on the facts in issue or relevant facts under Section 5 of the Indian Evidence Act, not by whether it relates to the character or background of the deceased.
On this section: Provides the right of accused to enter defence and compel attendance of witnesses. Sub-section (3) grants discretion to refuse if application is for vexation, delay, or defeating ends of justice. Court held this discretion must be exercised judicially and cannot be used to deny fundamental right to defend.
-
Arasi vs State of U.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 233, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused demands production of a forensic report or any other evidence that is relevant to the case under Section 233(1) read with Section 303 Cr.P.C., the trial court is obligated to summon and produce such evidence before the court, notwithstanding the prosecution's reluctance to rely upon it. The right of the accused to produce evidence in his defense is a fundamental procedural right that cannot be denied merely because the prosecution chooses not to rely upon certain documents.
On this section: Right of accused to produce any evidence in support of his defense
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 256
What have the courts held on Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
State of Punjab vs Hari Singh (16 Feb 2009) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 233, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Section 233 allows accused in Sessions trials to file written statements. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2009 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 256, section 256 BNSS, section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bns 256 section and 256 bnss in crpc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with State of Punjab vs Hari Singh (16 Feb 2009).
What should I read with Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 255 (Acquittal), so none of them can safely be read on its own. It carries forward CrPC 233 (Entering upon defence), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 256, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.