Judgment
Section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with judgment. The judgment in every trial in any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time not later than forty-five days of which notice shall be given to the parties or their advoca The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) The judgment in every trial in any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time not later than forty-five days of which notice shall be given to the parties or their advocates,---
(a) by delivering the whole of the judgment; or
(b) by reading out the whole of the judgment; or
(c) by reading out the operative part of the judgment and explaining the substance of the judgment in a language which is understood by the accused or his advocate.
(2) Where the judgment is delivered under clause (a) of sub-section (1), the presiding officer shall cause it to be taken down in short-hand, sign the transcript and every page thereof as soon as it is made ready, and write on it the date of the delivery of the judgment in open Court.
(3) Where the judgment or the operative part thereof is read out under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1), as the case may be, it shall be dated and signed by the presiding officer in open Court, and if it is not written with his own hand, every page of the judgment shall be signed by him.
(4) Where the judgment is pronounced in the manner specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1), the whole judgment or a copy thereof shall be immediately made available for the perusal of the parties or their advocates free of cost:
Provided that the Court shall, as far as practicable, upload the copy of the judgment on its portal within a period of seven days from the date of judgment.
(5) If the accused is in custody, he shall be brought up to hear the judgment pronounced either in person or through audio-video electronic means.
(6) If the accused is not in custody, he shall be required by the Court to attend to hear the judgment pronounced, except where his personal attendance during the trial has been dispensed with and the sentence is one of fine only or he is acquitted:
Provided that where there are more accused persons than one, and one or more of them do not attend the Court on the date on which the judgment is to be pronounced, the presiding officer may, in order to avoid undue delay in the disposal of the case, pronounce the judgment notwithstanding their absence.
(7) No judgment delivered by any Criminal Court shall be deemed to be invalid by reason only of the absence of any party or his advocate on the day or from the place notified for the delivery thereof, or of any omission to serve, or defect in serving, on the parties or their advocates, or any of them, the notice of such day and place.
(8) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit in any way the extent of the provisions of section 511.
Section 392, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 353 Judgment Text carried over almost unchanged 92%
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
Referred to by 1
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.
-
Amanul Haque @ Amanal Haque vs The State of Bihar& ORS.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 353, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When prosecution arguments in a criminal trial are completed, the trial court is fully justified in delivering the judgment on the same day without adjournment to another date, and such delivery does not violate Section 353(1) CrPC or constitute procedural irregularity warranting High Court interference in revision jurisdiction, particularly when the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence.
On this section: Timing and procedure for judgment pronouncement - central issue of the case; court held that judgment can be delivered on the same day if arguments are completed, as there is no mandatory requirement for adjournment
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 392
What have the courts held on Section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Amanul Haque @ Amanal Haque vs The State of Bihar& ORS. (23 Nov 2012) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 353, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Timing and procedure for judgment pronouncement - central issue of the case; court held that judgment can be delivered on the same day if arguments are completed, as there is no mandatory requirement for adjournment.
How do I find court cases under Section 392 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 392, section 392 BNSS, section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 392 6 and 392 bnss in crpc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Amanul Haque @ Amanal Haque vs The State of Bihar& ORS. (23 Nov 2012).
What should I read with Section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 511 (Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity), 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 353 (Judgment), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 392 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 392, 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.