CrPC Section 299 — Record of evidence in absence of accused

Summary

Sub-section (1) allows the court competent to try the accused, or commit the accused for trial, to examine prosecution witnesses and record their evidence in the accused’s absence if it is proved that the accused has absconded and there is no immediate prospect of arresting him. After the accused is arrested, a recorded deposition may be used as evidence against him in the inquiry or trial for the offence if the witness has died, cannot give evidence, cannot be found, or cannot be brought to court without unreasonable delay, expense or inconvenience in the circumstances.

Sub-section (2) applies if it appears that an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life was committed by a person or persons whose identity is unknown. The High Court or Sessions Judge may direct a Magistrate of the first class to hold an inquiry and examine witnesses who can give evidence about the offence. A deposition taken in that inquiry may be used as evidence against a person later accused of the offence if the witness has died, cannot give evidence, or is beyond the limits of India.

Official Text

(1) If it is proved that an accused person has absconded, and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, the Court competent to try 1[, or commit for trial,] such person for the offence complained of may, in his absence, examine the witnesses (if any) produced on behalf of the prosecution, and record their depositions and any such deposition may, on the arrest of such person, be given in evidence against him on the inquiry into, or trial for, the offence with which he is charged, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or cannot be found or his presence cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable.

(2) If it appears that an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life has been committed by some person or persons unknown, the High Court or the Sessions Judge may direct that any Magistrate of the first class shall hold an inquiry and examine any witnesses who can give evidence concerning the offence and any depositions so taken may be given in evidence against any person who is subsequently accused of the offence, if the deponent is dead or incapable of giving evidence or beyond the limits of India.

Related Judgments

• SUKHPAL SINGH vs NCT OF DELHI — Supreme Court of India (2024)
• NIRMAL SINGH vs STATE OF HARYANA — Supreme Court of India (2000)
• AFZAL @ AJMAL; Represented by:; Mr. Ankur Sood and Ms.; Romila Mandal, vs STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) — Delhi High Court (2019)
• JAYENDRA VISHNU THAKUR vs STATE OF MAHARAHSTRA AND ANOTHER — Supreme Court of India (2009)
• CHUNNI BAI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Supreme Court of India (2025)
• Vishnu @ Bablu Vasant Gavali vs The State of Maharashtra — Bombay High Court (Mumbai Principal Seat) (2024)

Old <-> New Code Mapping

• BNSS §335 — Record of evidence in absence of accused