Chapter XXIII
Section 299 CrPC: Record of evidence in absence of accused
New Law Update (2024)
Section 345 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Court competent to try or commit for trial; High Court; Sessions Judge; Magistrate of the first class
Punishment
Procedural – Investigation / Inquiry
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act 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 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.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 299(1) CrPC
This sub-section allows a court to record evidence from prosecution witnesses when an accused person has absconded and there is no immediate prospect of their arrest. The recorded statements can later be used in the inquiry or trial against the accused, provided the witness is no longer available to testify due to specific reasons like death or incapacity.
Section 299(2) CrPC
This sub-section enables the High Court or Sessions Judge to direct a First Class Magistrate to hold an inquiry and examine witnesses when a serious offence (punishable with death or life imprisonment) has been committed by unknown persons. The depositions taken can be used as evidence against anyone subsequently accused of the crime, if the deponent is unavailable.
Landmark Judgements
Smt. Ramvati Devi v. State of U.P. (1994):
The Supreme Court clarified that Section 299 CrPC provides an exceptional power to record evidence in the absence of an absconding accused, requiring strict proof of the conditions precedent like abscondence and no immediate prospect of arrest. This provision aims to preserve evidence crucial for later trial.
Jainandan @ Nandi Yadav v. State of Bihar (2012):
The Supreme Court affirmed that evidence recorded under Section 299 CrPC is admissible in subsequent inquiry or trial only if the deponent is unavailable due to death, incapacity, untraceability, or undue inconvenience. It serves to preserve testimony for future use, not as substantive proof in itself without fulfilling the specified conditions.