Interpretation of evidence to accused or his pleader
Section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with interpretation of evidence to accused or his pleader. Whenever any evidence is given in a language not understood by the accused, and he is present in Court in person, it shall be interpreted to him in open Court in a language understood by him. 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 Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried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) Whenever any evidence is given in a language not understood by the accused, and he is present in Court in person, it shall be interpreted to him in open Court in a language understood by him.
(2) If he appears by pleader and the evidence is given in a language other than the language of the Court, and not understood by
the pleader, it shall be interpreted to such pleader in that language.
(3) When documents are put for the purpose of formal proof, it shall be in the discretion of the Court to interpret as much thereof as appears necessary.
Section 279, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 314 Interpretation of evidence to accused or his advocate Close, with changes 85%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
-
Tuncay Alankus vs C.b.i.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the right to a fair trial includes the right to an interpreter who can accurately translate proceedings in a language understood by the accused, the trial court has discretion to assess whether a request for change of interpreter is warranted based on the actual proceedings, demonstrated prejudice, and interests of justice. The trial court's assessment of interpreter competence based on academic qualifications and the conduct of proceedings is entitled to deference, and a request for change of interpreter cannot be granted merely on the accused's assertion of incompetence without demonstrating actual prejudice or failure of justice. The provisions of Sections 278, 279, and 282 CrPC are mandatory in requiring provision of an interpreter, but do not mandate replacement of an interpreter upon every request by the accused.
On this section: Mandates that whenever evidence is given in a language not understood by the accused present in court, it shall be interpreted to him in open court in a language understood by him; this is a mandatory procedural requirement
-
O.p. Mishra vs The State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A prison superintendent cannot be held liable for non-production of an under-trial prisoner when the prisoner is detained in another state's jail by judicial order of a competent court. The duty to produce a prisoner under Sections 267 and 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code is limited to prisoners within the superintendent's custody and control. When a prisoner is detained outside the superintendent's jurisdiction by judicial order, the superintendent is not guilty of non-compliance or dereliction of duty, and the court must appreciate the circumstances that make compliance impossible.
On this section: Cited by petitioner as violated but not specifically analyzed in the judgment. Relates to prisoner production procedures.
-
Velu vs Chandran
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A criminal court judgment has only persuasive effect on a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal or appellate court in motor accident compensation proceedings. Where a claimant's own testimony in related criminal proceedings is hostile and contradicts the accident claim, and documentary evidence suggests an alternative cause of injury, the tribunal's dismissal for insufficient evidence will be upheld on appeal and review.
On this section: The criminal court acquitted the accused of offences under these sections (rash or negligent driving causing hurt) but convicted for driving without proper license, indicating insufficient evidence of the accident itself
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… right to the accused inasmuch as sub-section (1) to section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that if the accused is present in the Court in person any evidence given in a language not understood by him shall be interpreted to him in open Court in a language understood by him and sub-section (2) to section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that if an accused appears by his pleader and the evidence is given in a language other than the language of the Court, and not understood by the pleader, it shall be interpreted to such pleader in that language. It is nobody's case that the appellants do not understand …
Questions about Section 279
What have the courts held on Section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Tuncay Alankus vs C.b.i. (23 May 2008) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Mandates that whenever evidence is given in a language not understood by the accused present in court, it shall be interpreted to him in open court in a language understood by him; this is a mandatory procedural requirement. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2002 to 2008.
How do I find court cases under Section 279 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 279, section 279 CRPC, section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. People searching for it also type crpc 279 in bnss and 279 crpc pakistan. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Tuncay Alankus vs C.b.i. (23 May 2008).
What should I read with Section 279 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 314 (Interpretation of evidence to accused or his advocate), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 279, 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.