Code: Section 336 BNSS
336.
Where any document or report prepared by a public servant, scientific expert, medical officer, or investigating officer is purported to be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial, or other proceeding under this Sanhita, and—
(i) such public servant, expert, or officer is either transferred, retired, or died; or
(ii) such public servant, expert, or officer cannot be found or is incapable of giving deposition; or
(iii) securing the presence of such public servant, expert, or officer is likely to cause delay in holding the inquiry, trial, or other proceeding,
the Court shall secure the presence of the successor officer of such public servant, expert, or officer who is holding that post at the time of such deposition to give deposition on such document or report.
Explanation of Section 336 BNSS
Section 336 BNSS ensures that when a document or report is to be introduced as evidence, but the original preparer (be it a public servant, scientific expert, medical officer, or investigating officer) is unavailable—for reasons such as transfer, retirement, death, or unavailability—the Court will call upon the successor officer currently holding the position to give deposition regarding the document.
Key Points:
- Purpose:
To prevent delays or gaps in evidence presentation when the original preparer is unavailable, ensuring that the Court still obtains the necessary testimonial support regarding the document or report. - Applicability:
Applies to any document or report prepared by:- A public servant,
- A scientific expert,
- A medical officer, or
- An investigating officer.
- Conditions for Calling the Successor Officer:
- The original preparer is transferred, retired, or deceased.
- The original preparer cannot be found or is incapable of giving deposition.
- Requiring the original preparer’s presence would cause a significant delay in the proceedings.
- Mechanism:
The Court is empowered to call the successor officer (the person currently holding the post) to testify on the contents and preparation of the document or report. This maintains the continuity and integrity of the evidentiary process.
Illustrations
Example 1: Public Servant’s Report
- A report prepared by a government officer is to be used as evidence in a fraud inquiry.
- The officer has since retired.
- The Court calls upon the successor officer currently in that position to provide a deposition about the report’s preparation and contents.
Example 2: Medical Evidence
- A medical report prepared by a doctor is submitted as evidence in a case.
- The doctor, however, has moved to another jurisdiction and is unreachable.
- To avoid delay, the Court summons the current medical officer holding that position to explain and authenticate the report.
Example 3: Scientific Expert’s Analysis
- A laboratory analysis prepared by a scientific expert is introduced as evidence in a criminal trial.
- The expert is unavailable due to unforeseen circumstances (e.g., absence due to health issues).
- The Court secures the deposition of the successor expert now overseeing the lab to ensure that the evidentiary basis of the analysis is maintained.
Common Questions and Answers on Section 336 BNSS
1. Why is it necessary to call a successor officer for deposition?
Answer: To ensure that even if the original preparer of a document or report is unavailable, the Court can still obtain the necessary testimony regarding the document’s authenticity and preparation, thereby preventing delays in the proceedings.
2. Who qualifies as a “successor officer” under this section?
Answer: The successor officer is the individual who is currently holding the same post or position as the original preparer (whether a public servant, scientific expert, medical officer, or investigating officer) at the time the deposition is needed.
3. Under what circumstances will the Court secure a deposition from a successor officer?
Answer:
- When the original preparer has been transferred, retired, or died.
- When the original preparer cannot be found or is incapable of giving deposition.
- When obtaining the original preparer’s presence would cause a delay in the inquiry, trial, or other proceedings.
4. Does this provision affect the admissibility of the document or report as evidence?
Answer: No. This provision is designed to ensure that the evidentiary document or report remains reliable by providing a means to authenticate it via the deposition of a successor officer, thus preserving its admissibility.
Conclusion
Section 336 BNSS addresses a practical challenge in legal proceedings by ensuring that when the original preparer of a key document or report is unavailable, the Court can still obtain the necessary deposition from a successor officer. This mechanism helps maintain the continuity and reliability of evidence, thereby supporting the fair administration of justice without unnecessary delays.
For further legal analysis and updates on the BNSS provisions, visit ApniLaw!
This article is designed to be clear, comprehensive, and optimized for legal reference and SEO. Let me know if you need any further modifications or additional details.
