Code: Section 319 BNSS
319. (1) Whenever, in the course of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita, it appears to a Court or Magistrate that the examination of a witness is necessary for the ends of justice, and that the attendance of such witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable, the Court or Magistrate may dispense with such attendance and may issue a commission for the examination of the witness in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter:
Provided that where the examination of the President or the Vice-President of India or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory as a witness is necessary for the ends of Justice, a commission shall be issued for the examination of such a witness.
(2) The Court may, when issuing a commission for the examination of a witness for the prosecution, direct that such amount as the Court considers reasonable to meet the expenses of the accused, including the pleader’s fees, be paid by the prosecution.
Explanation of Section 319 BNSS
Section 319 BNSS establishes the circumstances under which a Court or Magistrate may dispense with the physical attendance of a witness and instead issue a commission for their examination. The key aspects of this section are:
- Necessity for Examination:
When it is determined that the examination of a witness is essential for the ends of justice, but obtaining the witness’s personal attendance would cause unreasonable delay, expense, or inconvenience, the Court or Magistrate is empowered to forgo personal attendance. - Issuance of a Commission:
In such cases, rather than compelling the witness to appear in person, the Court or Magistrate may issue a commission directing the witness’s examination. This commission is executed in accordance with the provisions laid out in the relevant Chapter of this Sanhita. - High-Level Witnesses:
A specific provision mandates that if the witness in question is the President or the Vice-President of India, the Governor of a State, or the Administrator of a Union territory, a commission must be issued for their examination, regardless of the other circumstances. This ensures that the examination of high-ranking officials is managed through this streamlined process. - Financial Considerations:
Additionally, when a commission is issued for the examination of a witness for the prosecution, the Court has the discretion to direct that a reasonable amount—covering the expenses of the accused, including pleader’s fees—be paid by the prosecution. This provision is intended to mitigate financial burdens on the accused resulting from the commission process.
Illustration
Example 1: Commission Issued Due to Logistical Constraints
In a complex criminal trial, a key witness resides in a remote area, and requiring the witness to travel to the court would result in significant delays and expense. The Court, recognizing that the testimony is crucial for justice, opts to dispense with the witness’s physical attendance and issues a commission for the examination of the witness. The witness’s examination is then conducted remotely or through written deposition as per the Commission’s terms.
Example 2: Commission for a High-Ranking Official
In an inquiry concerning governmental actions, it becomes necessary to examine the Governor of a State as a witness. Given the high office held by the Governor, the Court issues a commission for the examination without requiring the Governor to appear in person, in accordance with the mandatory provision of Section 319. This ensures that the necessary evidence is obtained while accommodating the constraints associated with summoning a high-ranking official.
Example 3: Cost Allocation for the Accused
During a trial, the prosecution obtains a commission for the examination of a witness critical to its case. Recognizing that the process incurs certain expenses, the Court directs that the prosecution pay a reasonable sum to cover the expenses of the accused, including the pleader’s fees. This decision is aimed at ensuring fairness and preventing undue financial burden on the accused.
Common Questions and Answers on Section 319 BNSS
1. Under what circumstances can a Court dispense with a witness’s attendance?
- Answer:
The Court may dispense with a witness’s attendance when it determines that the witness’s examination is necessary for justice, but securing the witness’s physical presence would involve unreasonable delay, expense, or inconvenience.
2. What is a commission in the context of Section 319?
- Answer:
A commission is an official directive issued by the Court or Magistrate that authorizes the examination of a witness without requiring their personal attendance in court. The witness’s evidence is then obtained through the commission process.
3. Are there any special provisions for high-ranking officials?
- Answer:
Yes, the provision explicitly mandates that if the witness is the President, the Vice-President of India, the Governor of a State, or the Administrator of a Union territory, a commission must be issued for their examination.
4. Who bears the cost of the commission process when it is issued for the examination of a witness for the prosecution?
- Answer:
The Court may direct that the prosecution pays a reasonable amount to cover the expenses of the accused, including the pleader’s fees, associated with the commission process.
5. What benefits does the commission process provide to the judicial proceedings?
- Answer:
The commission process expedites the gathering of crucial evidence by avoiding delays and logistical complications associated with obtaining the physical attendance of witnesses, thereby promoting a more efficient and effective judicial process.
Conclusion
Section 319 BNSS is a pivotal provision that facilitates the examination of witnesses when their physical attendance in court is impractical due to delays, expenses, or inconvenience. By allowing for the issuance of commissions, the provision ensures that vital evidence can be obtained in a timely and cost-effective manner while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process. Furthermore, it provides special measures for high-ranking officials and ensures financial fairness by potentially allocating costs to the prosecution. For more detailed legal insights and guidance on the application of this provision, visit ApniLaw.