Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) – Section 269
Section 269 of the BNSS outlines the procedure for framing charges and commencing trial in cases involving offences triable by a Magistrate.
Code: section 269
(1) If, when such evidence has been taken, or at any previous stage of the case,
the Magistrate is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has
committed an offence triable under this Chapter, which such Magistrate is competent to try
and which, in his opinion, could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a
charge against the accused.
(2) The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked
whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make.
(3) If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate shall record the plea, and may, in his
discretion, convict him thereon.
(4) If the accused refuses to plead, or does not plead or claims to be tried or if the
accused is not convicted under sub-section (3), he shall be required to state, at the
commencement of the next hearing of the case, or, if the Magistrate for reasons to be
recorded in writing so thinks fit, forthwith, whether he wishes to cross-examine any, and, if
so, which, of the witnesses for the prosecution whose evidence has been taken.
Code: (5),6(),(7)
(5) If he says he does so wish, the witnesses named by him shall be recalled and, after
cross-examination and re-examination (if any), they shall be discharged.
(6) The evidence of any remaining witnesses for the prosecution shall next be taken,
and after cross-examination and re-examination (if any), they shall also be discharged.
(7) Where, despite giving opportunity to the prosecution and after taking all reasonable
measures under this Sanhita, if the attendance of the prosecution witnesses under
sub-sections (5) and (6) cannot be secured for cross-examination, it shall be deemed that
such witness has not been examined for not being available, and the Magistrate may close
the prosecution evidence for reasons to be recorded in writing and proceed with the case
on the basis of the materials on record.
Explanation:
This section defines the steps a Magistrate must follow when deciding whether to proceed with a trial. It highlights the following points:
(1) Ground for Presumption: The Magistrate must first assess the evidence presented and determine whether there is sufficient ground to believe the accused committed the offence. This means there must be a reasonable likelihood, based on the evidence, that the accused committed the crime.
(2) Competency and Punishment: The Magistrate must be competent to try the offence, meaning they have the legal authority to handle the case. Additionally, the Magistrate must believe the offence can be adequately punished by them, meaning they have the sentencing power to impose an appropriate punishment.
(3) Framing Charges: If the Magistrate decides there is sufficient ground to proceed, they must frame charges against the accused in writing. This formally accuses the accused of the specific offence(s) they are alleged to have committed.
(4) Plea and Defence: The charges are read and explained to the accused, who is then asked to plead guilty or not guilty. The accused also has the opportunity to state any defence they have.
Explanation:
(5) Guilty Plea: If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate can convict them based on that plea. However, the Magistrate may also choose to hold a further hearing before convicting.
(6) Not Guilty Plea: If the accused refuses to plead, does not plead, claims to be tried, or is not convicted under the guilty plea provision, the trial process begins. This involves the accused stating whether they wish to cross-examine any prosecution witnesses. This can be done at the next hearing or immediately, at the Magistrate’s discretion.
(7) Witness Testimony: The accused can cross-examine prosecution witnesses, and the Magistrate can then take evidence from remaining prosecution witnesses. Witnesses are then discharged after cross-examination and re-examination.
Witness Unavailability: If prosecution witnesses are unavailable for cross-examination. Despite efforts to secure their attendance, the Magistrate can proceed based on the existing evidence and close the prosecution’s case.
Illustration:
Imagine a case where a person is accused of theft. The Magistrate hears evidence from witnesses and considers the available evidence. The Magistrate believes there is sufficient evidence to suggest the accused stole the property. They have the authority to try the case and impose a suitable punishment, they will frame charges against the accused. The accused will then be asked to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, the Magistrate will proceed with the trial. Thus, allowing the accused to cross-examine witnesses and present their own evidence. If a witness is unavailable, the Magistrate can close the prosecution’s case and move forward based on the available evidence.
Common Questions & Answers
- Q: What if the accused pleads guilty but later changes their mind?
- A: The accused can change their plea, but it is subject to the Magistrate’s discretion. The Magistrate might allow the change, but they may also require further evidence or proceed based on the original guilty plea.
- Q: What happens if the Magistrate believes the offence is too serious for them to try?
- A: If the Magistrate is not competent to try the offence or believes it is beyond their sentencing power, they will refer the case to a higher court.
- Q: Can the accused refuse to be tried by a Magistrate?
- A: The accused has the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be tried by a competent court. They cannot refuse a trial by a Magistrate if the Magistrate is legally competent to handle the case.
