Evidence of officers of Mint
Section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with evidence of officers of Mint. Any document purporting to be a report under the hand of a gazetted officer of any Mint or of any Note Printing Press or of any Security Printing Press (including the officer of the Controller of Stamps and Stationery) or of any Forensic Department or Division of Forensic Science Laboratory or any G The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Any document purporting to be a report under the hand of a gazetted officer of any Mint or of any Note Printing Press or of any Security Printing Press (including the officer of the Controller of Stamps and Stationery) or of any Forensic Department or Division of Forensic Science Laboratory or any Government Examiner of Questioned Documents or any State Examiner of Questioned Documents as the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf, upon any matter or thing duly submitted to him for examination and report in the course of any proceeding under this Sanhita, may be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita, although such officer is not called as a witness.
(2) The Court may, if it thinks fit, summon and examine any such officer as to the subject-matter of his report:
Provided that no such officer shall be summoned to produce any records on which the report is based.
(3) Without prejudice to the provisions of sections 129 and 130 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, no such officer shall, except with the permission of the General Manager or any officer in charge of any Mint or of any Note Printing Press or of any Security Printing Press or of any Forensic Department or any officer in charge of the Forensic Science Laboratory or of the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents Organisation or of the State Examiner of Questioned Documents Organisation be permitted---
(a) to give any evidence derived from any unpublished official records on which the report is based; or
(b) to disclose the nature or particulars of any test applied by him in the course of the examination of the matter or thing.
Section 328, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 292 Evidence of officers of the Mint Text carried over almost unchanged 86%
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.
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.
-
P.v.ramana Murthy vs State of A.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 292, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While Section 292 Cr.P.C. permits admission of expert reports without calling the expert as a witness, the admissibility and proof of such documents must still be in accordance with the procedure established under law. The trial court has the discretion to mark the document but must ultimately determine its admissibility and proof at the judgment stage. If a document is not properly proved in accordance with legal procedure, it cannot be relied upon by the court, and marking it would be a futile exercise. The accused retains the right to examine the expert in defence.
On this section: Admissibility of expert reports and opinions in evidence without necessarily calling the expert as a witness
-
Ugranarain Rai vs State of Bihar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 292, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Mere possession of currency notes, even if they are counterfeit, does not constitute an offence under Sections 489B and 489C IPC unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed the notes with knowledge or with reason to believe that they were counterfeit. Additionally, a preliminary opinion from the Reserve Bank of India is not admissible under Section 292 Cr.P.C. to establish that currency notes are counterfeit; only the final opinion from the authorized mint at Dewas, Madhya Pradesh is admissible for this purpose. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish each and every ingredient of the offence through admissible evidence, and circumstantial evidence or preliminary expert opinions are insufficient to sustain a conviction for counterfeiting offences.
On this section: Admissibility of expert opinion - only opinion from authorized mint (Dewas, Madhya Pradesh) is admissible for determining genuineness of currency notes; RBI preliminary opinion is not admissible for final determination
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 328
What have the courts held on Section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
P.v.ramana Murthy vs State of A.p. (11 Sep 2018) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 292, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Admissibility of expert reports and opinions in evidence without necessarily calling the expert as a witness. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below. They run from 2011 to 2018.
How do I find court cases under Section 328 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 328, section 328 BNSS, section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with P.v.ramana Murthy vs State of A.p. (11 Sep 2018).
What should I read with Section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 129 (Evidence as to affairs of State), Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 130 (Official communications), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward CrPC 292 (Evidence of officers of the Mint), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 328 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 328, 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.