Right of person against whom proceedings are instituted to be defended
Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with right of person against whom proceedings are instituted to be defended. Any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court, or against whom proceedings are instituted under this Sanhita, may of right be defended by an advocate of his choice. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court, or against whom proceedings are instituted under this Sanhita, may of right be defended by an advocate of his choice.
Section 340, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 303 Right of person against whom proceedings are instituted to bedefended Text carried over almost unchanged 87%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
-
BHOOP SINGH vs STATE
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 303, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The examination of prosecution witnesses in the absence of defence counsel violates the constitutional right to legal representation guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice. It is the constitutional duty of the trial court to ensure that an accused person is represented by counsel during the entire course of trial, particularly during examination of prosecution witnesses. The absence of defence counsel during such examination renders the trial fundamentally unfair and vitiates the conviction, necessitating remand for proper cross-examination of witnesses with legal representation.
On this section: Right of accused to be defended by a lawyer of his choice; constitutional right to legal representation
-
Arasi vs State of U.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 303, 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: Read with Section 233(1) to establish accused's right to produce evidence
-
Krishnaiah vs State Rep. by
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 303, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A trial court cannot impose exorbitant or unreasonable conditions on witness recall that economically disable an accused from exercising his constitutionally guaranteed right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses and defend himself effectively. The phrase 'reasonable expenses' in Sections 243(3) and 312 CrPC must be interpreted as a limiting principle, and witness batta must be restricted to actual travelling costs (appropriate class based on officer rank) and subsistence allowance (Rs.600/- per day for necessary days). Any condition that puts economic fetters on the right to cross-examination violates Articles 14, 21, and 22 of the Constitution and the principle of fair trial established in Maneka Gandhi. The imposition of costs to legal services authorities as a condition for witness recall is not justified and restricts the right of cross-examination.
On this section: Cited to establish that the right to fair trial is statutorily expressed in the Code, and any unfair procedure in a criminal trial will vitiate the trial.
-
Ramdeo Verma& ORS. vs State of Bihar& ANR.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 303, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
At the time of framing charge or taking cognizance of an offence, an accused person has no right to produce any material or document. The right to be defended by a pleader of choice under Section 303 CrPC does not extend to producing documents at the inquiry stage. The settled law as pronounced by the Supreme Court in State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi prohibits consideration of documents filed by accused at the inquiry stage, and the High Court can only consider such documents in rare and exceptional cases while exercising Section 482 jurisdiction.
On this section: Right of accused to be defended by pleader of choice - interpreted in context of inquiry stage rights
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 340
What have the courts held on Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
BHOOP SINGH vs STATE (20 Apr 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 303, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Right of accused to be defended by a lawyer of his choice; constitutional right to legal representation. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2010 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 340 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 340, section 340 BNSS, section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 340(2) and bns 340 2 in hindi punishment. 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 BHOOP SINGH vs STATE (20 Apr 2019).
What should I read with Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward CrPC 303 (Right of person against whom proceedings are instituted to bedefended), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 340, 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 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.