Non-appearance or death of complainant
Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with non-appearance or death of complainant. If the summons has been issued on complaint, and on the day appointed for the appearance of the accused, or any day subsequent thereto to which the hearing may be adjourned, the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate shall, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, acquit the accused, un The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
(1) If the summons has been issued on complaint, and on the day appointed for the appearance of the accused, or any day subsequent thereto to which the hearing may be adjourned, the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate shall, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, acquit the accused, unless for some reason he thinks it proper to adjourn the hearing of the case to some other day:
Provided that where the complainant is represented by a pleader or by the officer conducting the prosecution or where the Magistrate is of opinion that the personal attendance of the complainant is not necessary, the Magistrate may dispense with his attendance and proceed with the case.
(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall, so far as may be, apply also to cases where the non-appearance of the complainant is due to his death.
Section 256, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 279 Non-appearance or death of complainant Text carried over almost unchanged 96%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
-
Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-1.pdf 1997-12-16 DATE VERIFIED. Mukherjee/Thomas. J&K old Code 247 = CrPC 1973 s.256. Magistrate must not mechanically acquit on complainant absence; consider adjournment and whether personal attendance is necessary. A company complainant needs a de facto natural-person representative. Map crpc 256 + BNSS 279 successor (near-identical 0.9609). Do not pad NI 138 (already filled).
On this section: CrPC 256 does not require mechanical acquittal on complainant absence; adjourn or dispense with attendance if presence is unnecessary, and a company needs a de facto natural-person representative (Associated Cement).
-
Rashida Kamaluddin Syed vs Shaikh Saheblal Maradn (d) Th. Lrs.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Upon the death of a complainant in a criminal case, the proceedings do not abate. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not expressly provide for abatement of inquiries and trials upon death of a complainant. Legal heirs of a deceased complainant can be validly permitted by the court to continue the criminal prosecution against the accused under Section 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (corresponding to Section 495 of the old Code). This principle applies to all criminal cases based on the scheme of the Code and is not limited to cases triable by the Court of Session or cases involving any particular level of offence. Once such permission is granted by the court and is not challenged by the accused, it attains finality and cannot be subsequently challenged as illegal or unlawful.
On this section: Dismissal of complaint - Referenced in context of dismissal applications
-
Rani vs Rakesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a Magistrate exercises discretion under Section 249 Cr.P.C. to discharge an accused due to non-appearance of complainant, such discretion being judicial in nature must be exercised reasonably and with utmost caution. The court should not automatically discharge the accused upon every instance of complainant's absence. Instead, the court must examine whether the complainant has actively pursued the case with dedication or attended casually. A single non-appearance, particularly when the complainant has been regularly appearing and pursuing the case, should not result in automatic discharge. The discretion must be exercised judiciously after thorough examination of facts, and not arbitrarily. An order of discharge under Section 249 Cr.P.C. is a final order amenable to revision before the Sessions Court, and the distinction between discharge under Section 249 and acquittal under Section 256 must be properly appreciated.
On this section: Acquittal of accused; cited to distinguish acquittal in summons cases from discharge in warrant cases; court noted that Section 256 results in acquittal while Section 249 results in discharge
-
BALA GANESAN vs RAVICHANDRAN
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a criminal complaint remains pending for an extended period with the prosecution witness failing to appear despite multiple opportunities and the complainant showing no interest in prosecuting the case, the court may dismiss the complaint for non-prosecution under Section 256 CrPC, particularly when the case exceeds the Supreme Court's guideline of 2 years for closing prosecution evidence in cases punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 7 years.
On this section: Applied for dismissal of the criminal complaint for non-prosecution. Section 256 CrPC provides for dismissal of cases when the complainant or informant does not appear or when the court finds no sufficient ground for proceeding with the case.
-
Credila Financial Services PVT LTD vs Korukonda Vekateshwar Rao
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A revision petition is maintainable against the dismissal of a complaint in default if the order of dismissal is passed prior to the summoning of the accused, as such an order does not amount to an acquittal.
On this section: Mentioned to distinguish between dismissal before and after summoning 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 256
What have the courts held on Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand (16 Dec 1997) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: CrPC 256 does not require mechanical acquittal on complainant absence; adjourn or dispense with attendance if presence is unnecessary, and a company needs a de facto natural-person representative (Associated Cement). Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 1997 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
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: CRPC 256, section 256 CRPC, section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 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 Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand (16 Dec 1997).
What should I read with Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 279 (Non-appearance or death of complainant), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 256, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.