Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 355
Provision for inquiries and trial being held in absence of accused in certain cases
(1) At any stage of an inquiry or trial under this Sanhita, if the Judge or Magistrate is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded, that the personal attendance of the accused before the Court is not necessary in the interests of justice, or that the accused persistently disturbs the proceedings in Court, the Judge or Magistrate may, if the accused is represented by an advocate, dispense with his attendance and proceed with such inquiry or trial in his absence, and may, at any subsequent stage of the proceedings, direct the personal attendance of such accused.
(2) If the accused in any such case is not represented by an advocate, or if the Judge or Magistrate considers his personal attendance necessary, he may, if he thinks fit and for reasons to be recorded by him, either adjourn such inquiry or trial, or order that the case of such accused be taken up or tried separately. Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, personal attendance of the accused includes attendance through audio-video electronic means.
Why this exists
This provision allows trials to proceed efficiently even when an accused's presence is not essential or when their disruptive conduct threatens to derail proceedings, while safeguarding fairness by requiring legal representation whenever attendance is dispensed with, and by explicitly recognising video-conferencing as a valid form of attendance for the modern era.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: A trial can proceed in the accused's complete absence with no lawyer representing them.
Fact: The provision only allows dispensing with personal attendance if the accused is represented by an advocate; if there is no lawyer, the judge must either adjourn the case or handle it separately, not simply proceed unrepresented.