Record of evidence in absence of accused
Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with record of evidence in absence of accused. If it is proved that an accused person has absconded, and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, the Court competent to try, or commit for trial, such person for the offence complained of may, in his absence, examine the witnesses (if any) produced on behalf of the prosecution, and re The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) If it is proved that an accused person has absconded, and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, the Court competent to try, or commit for trial, such person for the offence complained of may, in his absence, examine the witnesses (if any) produced on behalf of the prosecution, and record their depositions and any such deposition may, on the arrest of such person, be given in evidence against him on the inquiry into, or trial for, the offence with which he is charged, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or cannot be found or his presence cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable.
(2) If it appears that an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life has been committed by some person or persons unknown, the High Court or the Sessions Judge may direct that any Magistrate of the first class shall hold an inquiry and examine any witnesses who can give evidence concerning the offence and any depositions so taken may be given in evidence against any person who is subsequently accused of the offence, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or beyond the limits of India.
Section 335, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 299 Record of evidence in absence of accused Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Gautam Kumar Devjibhai vs State of Gujarat
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 299, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Evidence recorded in one criminal trial against different accused persons cannot be transferred to another trial and read against an accused who was not present during the original trial unless the transfer is effected in compliance with Section 299 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, with proper court order explicitly approving such transfer, and without violating the accused's right to cross-examine witnesses. An accused person's mere absconding does not automatically waive his right to cross-examination; such waiver must be established through proper legal procedure. Appellate courts cannot ignore trial courts' explicit rejection of applications for evidence transfer and must independently examine whether transferred evidence was validly admitted before relying upon it for conviction. An acquittal can be reversed only if there exists independent evidence, beyond transferred evidence whose admissibility is disputed, that establishes guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Evidence recorded in one trial can be transferred to another trial only under specific conditions with proper procedure; central issue in judgment - whether trial court's rejection of transfer application was properly considered by High Court
-
C. G. Electricity Power Distribution Company LTD vs Basant Singh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 299, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused person repeatedly fails to appear before the court despite multiple summons issued through various methods over an extended period, and there is evidence suggesting the accused has knowledge of the proceedings but is deliberately absenting himself, the court may declare the accused a fugitive under Section 299 Cr.P.C. and Section 335 Cr.P.C., thereby authorizing the issuance of a permanent warrant for arrest.
On this section: Procedural provision invoked to declare the accused a fugitive due to his repeated non-appearance and failure to comply with court summons
-
Rajender Singh vs State of Haryana
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 299, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The mandatory requirement under Section 275(4) Cr.P.C. that witness depositions in warrant cases must be signed by the Magistrate is not a curable irregularity but a fatal defect that renders the evidence inadmissible and vitiates the entire trial. Additionally, the right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses is a fundamental component of the right to fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, and denial of this right prejudices the accused and violates principles of natural justice. When an Investigating Officer fails to appear for cross-examination, the evidence collected by that officer remains unproved and cannot be relied upon for conviction.
On this section: Exception to cross-examination requirement for certain statements
-
Subhash vs State
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 299, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Once an absconding accused appears before the court and faces trial, the purpose of property attachment under Section 82 CrPC is achieved and the attached property must be released, regardless of whether the application for release is technically time-barred under Section 85(3) CrPC, particularly when the accused was genuinely unaware of the proceedings due to being out of the country. The purpose of Section 82 CrPC is limited to securing the attendance of the accused, not to punish him or permanently deprive him of property. Once this purpose is achieved through the accused's appearance and trial, substantive justice requires that the property be restored to the accused, even if he has been acquitted.
On this section: Charge-sheet filing. Court noted that charge-sheet was filed against the appellant under this section.
-
State of Maha vs Suresh Dhanorkar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 299, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When material witnesses are untraceable after decades and the prosecution fails to produce substantive evidence, the charge is considered 'groundless' under Section 239 CrPC.
On this section: Provision for recording evidence in the absence of the accused.
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 335
What have the courts held on Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Gautam Kumar Devjibhai vs State of Gujarat (25 Apr 2014) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 299, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Evidence recorded in one trial can be transferred to another trial only under specific conditions with proper procedure; central issue in judgment - whether trial court's rejection of transfer application was properly considered by High Court. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2014 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 335 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 335, section 335 BNSS, section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 335 in crpc and bnss 335 1. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Gautam Kumar Devjibhai vs State of Gujarat (25 Apr 2014).
What should I read with Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
It carries forward CrPC 299 (Record of evidence in absence of accused), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 335, 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.