RECORDING OF EVIDENCE IN

INQUIRIES AND TRAILS

 INTRODUCTION
• THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 IS AN ACT TO CONSOLIDATE AND AMEND THE
LAW RELATING TO CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. IT CAME INTO FORCE ON THE FIRST DAY OF APR
1974 AS THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 (ACT 2 OF1974).

• THERE ARE 524 SECTIONS IN THE CODE AFTER ADDITION OF 40 SECTIONS THROUGH
AMENDMENT ACTS IN 2005 AND2006. THE OBJECT OF THE CODE IS TO ENSURE THAT THE
ACCUSED PERSON GETS A FULL AND FAIR TRIAL UNDER A WELL-ESTABLISHED AND WELL
UNDERSTOOD SYSTEM THAT ACCORD WITH OUR NOTIONS OF NATURAL JUSTICE.

• CHAPTER XXIII OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE FROM SECTION 272 TO SECTION 299 HAS
ELABORATELY DEALT WITH THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED FOR RECORDING OF
EVIDENCES BEGINNING FROM THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH IT IS TO BE RECORDED TO ISSUE OF
COMMISSION. PART A OF THIS CHAPTER CONTAINING SECTIONS 272 TO 283 DEALS WITH THE
MODE OF TAKING AND RECORDING EVIDENCE

• DESCRIBE IN DETAIL THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE FOR
RECORDING OF EVIDENCE IN INQUIRIES AND TRAILS.
 OVERVIEW OF THE SECTIONS
• LANGUAGE OF COURTS - SECTION 272
• EVIDENCE TO BE TAKEN IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED - SECTION 273
• RECORDING IN SUMMONS CASES AND INQUIRIES - SECTION 274
• RECORDING IN WARRANT CASES - SECTION 275
• RECORD IN TRIAL BEFORE COURT OF SESSIONS - SECTION 276
• LANGUAGE OF RECORD OF EVIDENCE - SECTION 277
• PROCEDURE WHEN RECORD OF EVIDENCE IS COMPLETED - SECTION 278
• INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE TO ACCUSED OR HIS PLEADER - SECTION 279
• REMARKS RESPECTING DEMEANOUR OF WITNESS - SECTION 280
• RECORD OF EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED - SECTION 281
• INTERPRETER TO BE BOUND TO INTERPRET TRUTHFULLY - SECTION 282
• RECORD IN HIGH COURT - SECTION 283
 LANGUAGE OF THE COURT
• BY VIRTUE OF SEC 272 STATE HAS THE DUTY TO DETERMINE THE
LANGUAGE TO BE USED BY ALL THE COURTS FOR RECORDING OF
EVIDENCE IN A STATE EXCEPT THE HIGH COURT IN WHICH THE
EVIDENCES ARE RECORDED.
• THIS PROVISION PROVIDES GUIDELINES AS TO WHICH LANGUAGE CAN
BE ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING THE EVIDENCES MAKING THE
PROCEDURE EASIER FOR COURTS AND ALSO IN MOST OF THE LOWER
COURTS IT IS PROBABLE THE WITNESSES MAY ONLY BE ACQUAINTED
WITH VERNACULAR AND THEREFORE ACCEPTING THE STATEMENT IN
THE VERNACULAR LANGUAGE BECOMES IMPORTANT.
• HOWEVER, THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE
SUPREME COURT AND EVERY HIGH COURT SHALL BE IN ENGLISH
UNTIL PARLIAMENT OTHERWISE PROVIDES.
EVIDENCETO BE COLLECTED IN PRESENCE OF
ACCUSED
• THE SEC 273 CRPC MANDATES THE EVIDENCE TO BE RECORDED IN PRESENCE OF THE
ACCUSED, OR HIS PLEADER. THIS ENSURES THAT THE ACCUSED IS AWARE OF ALL THE
EXISTENT EVIDENCES THAT ARE PRESENTED BEFORE THE COURT BY THE OPPOSITE COUNCIL
SO AS TO SUCCESSFULLY PLEAD HIS CASE AND EXERCISE HIS RIGHT OF CROSS EXAMINATION
WHEREVER NECESSARY PROVIDING THE DEFENSE WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO
METICULOUSLY EXAMINE THE VERACITY OF THE EVIDENCES.

• IN THE CASE OF BANCHHANIDHI VS. STATE OF ORISSA THAT FOR DETERMINATION OF GUILT
OF ACCUSED IN A CASE OF THEFT UNDER SECTION 379 OF IPC SOME OF THE EVIDENCES
WHICH WERE RECORDED WERE IN ABSENCE OF THE ACCUSED AS WELL AS HIS
REPRESENTATIVE. THE COURT CONSIDERED IT A GROSS VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
UNDER SECTION 273 AND THUS ON THAT GROUND THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING WAS VITIATED.

• IN ANANTHA SINGH V. STATE THE COURT HELD THAT AN ACCUSED WHO WAS EXPELLED
FROM COURT FOR HIS MISBEHAVIOUR CAN CLAIM HIS RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT THE TRIAL
ON A BONAFIDE PROMISE OF GOOD CONDUCT AND BEHAVIOUR. IT WAS SO HELD IN SAKAN
RAJ V. STATE THAT UNDER THIS SECTION IT IS ALSO MANDATORY THAT ALL OPPORTUNITIES
MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE ACCUSED TO DEFEND HIMSELF BY QUESTIONING THE VERACITY
OF THE WITNESSES THROUGH CROSS EXAMINATION
EVIDENCE RECORDING IN SUMMONS CASES

• Section 274. The section deals with the recording of evidence in

summons cases in all Inquiries under sections 145 to 148 both
inclusive and all proceedings under section 446 other wise than
in the course of trial.
• Magistrate shall record memorandum of substance of evidence
in the language of the court and it must be signed by him. The
memorandum is to be made by the Magistrate himself and if
due to any circumstance he is unable to do so he shall, after
recording the reason of his inability, cause such memorandum
to be made in writing or from his dictation in open Court. Such
memorandum shall be signed by the Magistrate and shall form
part of the record.
 WARRANT CASES
• SECTION 275. IN ALL WARRANT CASES, THE EVIDENCE OF EACH WITNESS SHALL BE TAKEN DOWN IN
WRITING EITHER BY MAGISTRATE IF HE IS UNABLE TO DO SO DUE TO PHYSICAL OR OTHER INCAPACITY,
UNDER HIS DIRECTION AND SUPERINTENDENCE, BY AN OFFICER OF THE COURT APPOINTED BY HIM IN HIS
BEHALF.
• EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS IN A WARRANT CASE BEFORE A MAGISTRATE MAY ALSO BE RECORDED BY
AUDIO-VIDEO ELECTRONIC MEANS IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ADVOCATE OF THE PERSON ACCUSED OF THE
OFFENCE. THE PROVISION WAS INCORPORATED BY ACT 5 OF 2009 AS WAS HELD IN THE CASE OF STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA VS. DR. PRAFUL B. DESAI .
• THE SECTION PERMITS THE MAGISTRATE TO RECORD THE EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF QUESTIONS AND
ANSWER. RECORDING OF EVIDENCE BY VIDEO CONFERENCING ALSO SATISFIES THE OBJECT OF
PROVIDING, IN SECTION 273, THAT EVIDENCE BE RECORDED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED. THE
ACCUSED AND HIS PLEADER CAN SEE THE WITNESS AS CLEARLY AS IF THE WITNESS WAS ACTUALLY
SITTING BEFORE THEM. THEY CAN OBSERVE HIS OR HER DEMEANOUR AND THE FACILITY TO PLAY BACK
WOULD ENABLE BETTER OBSERVATION OF DEMEANOUR. THEY CAN HEAR AND REHEAR THE DEPOSITION
OF THE WITNESS.

• THE ACCUSED WOULD BE ABLE TO INSTRUCT HIS PLEADER IMMEDIATELY AND THUS CROSS-
EXAMINATION OF THE WITNESS IS AS EFFECTIVE, IF NOT BETTER. THE FACILITY OF PLAY BACK WOULD GIVE
AN ADDED ADVANTAGE WHILST CROSS- EXAMINING THE WITNESS. THE WITNESS CAN BE CONFRONTED
WITH DOCUMENTS OR OTHER MATERIAL OR STATEMENT IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF HE/SHE WAS IN
COURT. ALL THESE OBJECTS WOULD BE FULLY MET WHEN EVIDENCE IS RECORDED BY VIDEO
CONFERENCING.
 EVIDENCE IN SESSIONS COURT
• SECTION 276. IN ALL TRIALS BEFORE A COURT OF SESSIONS, THE
EVIDENCE OF EACH WITNESS SHALL, AS HIS EXAMINATION PROCEEDS
BE TAKEN DOWN IN WRITING EITHER BY THE PRESIDING JUDGE
HIMSELF OR BY HIS DICTATION IN OPEN COURT OR UNDER HIS
DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION BY AN OFFICER OF THE COURT
APPOINTED BY HIM.
• RECORDING OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SESSION COURT WILL BE IN THE
FORM OF NARRATIVE AND THE EVIDENCE SO TAKEN DOWN SHALL BE
SIGNED BY HIM WHICH WILL BE A PART OF THE RECORD. THE
PRESIDING OFFICER IN HIS DISCRETION CAN TAKE DOWN ANY PART
OF EVIDENCE IN
• FORM OF QUESTION AND ANSWER AND IT HAS TO BE SIGNED BY HIM
 LANGAUAGE FOR EVIDENCE
• SECTION 277. DEALS WITH THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH THE RECORD OF EVIDENCE IS TO BE DONE WHILE TAKING DOWN EVIDENCE
UNDER SECTIONS 275 AND 276 MENTION IF THE WITNESS GIVES THE EVIDENCE IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT IT SHALL BE
RECORDED ACCORDINGLY. IF THE WITNESS DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT AND WISHES TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN
ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THE COURT WILL RECORD THE STATEMENT IN THAT LANGUAGE IF IT IS PRACTICABLE.

• IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE, TRUE TRANSLATION IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT SHALL BE PREPARED AS THE EXAMINATION OF THE
WITNESS PROCEEDS DULY SIGNED BY THE MAGISTRATE OR THE PRESIDING JUDGE AND IT SHALL BE A PART OF THE RECORD. WHEN
THE EVIDENCE IS GIVEN BY THE WITNESS IN ENGLISH AND IF A TRANSLATION IS NOT REQUIRED BY ANY OF THE PARTIES, THE COURT
MAY DISPENSE WITH THE TRANSLATION OF EVIDENCE.

• IN THE CASE OF SEJAL SURESH KUMAR V. STATE OF GUJARAT 8 THE HON’BLE COURT WHILE GRANTING THE REQUEST OF THE ACCUSED
FOR A TRANSLATED COPY OF EVIDENCES GIVEN IN GUJARATI LANGUAGE IN EITHER HINDI OR ENGLISH FOR THE PERUSAL OF ACCUSED,
HIGHLIGHTED THE SIGNIFICANCE OF RECORDING THE EVIDENCE IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT. THE COURT MAINTAINED THAT THE
EVIDENCES MUST BE TAKEN BY THE COURTS UNDER SECTION 275 OR 276 IN THE LANGUAGE OF
• THE COURT IF THE WITNESSES ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THE SAME. HOWEVER, THE COURT ALSO HELD THAT IN CASES WHERE THE
EVIDENCE IS GIVEN IN A LANGUAGE WHICH COULD NOT BE COMPREHENDED BY THE COURT THE EVIDENCE HAS TO BE PRIMARILY
RECORDED IN THE LANGUAGE THE PERSON IS COMFORTABLE WITH. THE LANGUAGE IS NO BAR FOR ACCEPTING ANY EVIDENCE WHICH
COULD POSSIBLY BE SUBSTANTIVE IN DETERMINING GUILT.

• IN THE CASE OF SRI JAYENDRA SARASWATHY SWAMIGAL V. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHER 9 WHILE DISCUSSING UPON THE
TRANSFERABILITY OF CASE FOR CONVENIENCE OF PROSECUTING AGENCY THE COURT STATED THAT IN VIEW OF SECTION 277 CRPC IF
THE WITNESS DOES NOT GIVE STATEMENT IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT, A TRANSLATION OF THE EVIDENCE IN THE LANGUAGE OF
THE COURT HAS TO BE PREPARED AS THE EXAMINATION OF THE WITNESS PROCEEDS AND, THEREFORE, TRANSFERRING THE CASE TO A
DISTRICT WHICH IS NOT TAMIL SPEAKING WAS ALSO PERMISSIBLE UNDER LAW. THE CONVENIENCE OF THE PROSECUTING AGENCY,
ESPECIALLY IN A CASE WHERE THERE ARE LARGE NUMBER OF WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS, HAS ALSO AN IMPORTANT BEARING. WE
ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT THE CASE MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO PONDICHERRY AS THERE WILL BE NO DIFFICULTY IN
RECORDING THE EVIDENCE IN THE SAME LANGUAGE IN WHICH ALMOST ALL THE WITNESSES WOULD DEPOSE AND WITH WHICH THE
PRESIDING JUDGE WOULD BE FAMILIAR.
 PROCEDURE WHEN RECORDING IS
COMPLETED
• AS PER SECTION 278, THE EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS WHEN COMPLETED SHOULD BE READ OVER TO
HIM IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED OR HIS PLEADER. IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE AT THE END OF
THE DAY AFTER EXAMINING ALL WITNESSES. IT CAN BE CORRECTED BY THE ACCUSED IF NEEDED.
• IF THE WITNESS DENIES THE CORRECTNESS OF ANY PART OF THE EVIDENCE WHEN THE SAME IS READ
OVER ,IT SHALL BE CORRECTED IF NECESSARY OR THE MAGISTRATE OR PRESIDING JUDGE CAN
INSTEAD MAKE A MEMORANDUM THEREON OF THE OBJECTION MADE TO IT AND ADD SUCH
REMARKS AS THEY THINK IS NECESSARY, THEY HAVE THE DISCRETION TO DECIDE THE SAME.
• THE COURT EVEN HAS THE POWER TO RECORD ANY MATERIAL REMARKS REGARDING THE
DEMEANOUR OF WITNESS WHILE HE WAS BEING EXAMINED. IN CASES WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS
RECORDED IN A LANGUAGE DIFFERENT FROM WHICH IT HAD BEEN GIVEN IN AND THE WITNESS IS
UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT LANGUAGE, THE RECORD SHALL BE INTERPRETED TO HIM IN THE
LANGUAGE IN WHICH IT WAS GIVEN, OR IN A LANGUAGE WHICH HE UNDERSTANDS.
• THE EVIDENCES ARE TAKEN IN PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED AS PROVIDED BY SEC 273, AND THE SAME
PROCEDURE IS FOLLOWED IN CASES WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS GIVEN IN A LANGUAGE NOT
UNDERSTANDABLE BY THE ACCUSED OR HIS PLEADER IF HE IS REPRESENTED BY HIM IT IS
INTERPRETED IN THE LANGUAGE UNDERSTOOD. HOWEVER, THE COURT HAS DISCRETION TO
INTERPRET ONLY THE NECESSARY PARTS WHEN THE DOCUMENTS ARE PUT FOR FORMAL PROOF .
 MISC PROVISIONS
• INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE TO ACCUSED OR HIS PLEADER. SECTION 279 OF CRPC STIPULATES THAT WHENEVER ANY
EVIDENCE IS GIVEN IN A LANGUAGE NOT UNDERSTOOD BY THE ACCUSED AND HE IS PRESENT IN COURT IN PERSON, IT
SHALL BE INTERPRETED TO HIM IN OPEN COURT IN A LANGUAGE UNDERSTOOD BY HIM. THE SAME IS APPLICABLE TO A
PLEADER WHO REPRESENTS THE ACCUSED IN HIS ABSENCE. WHEN DOCUMENTS ARE PRESENTED AS EVIDENCE IN A
LANGUAGE WHICH IS NOT UNDERSTOOD BY THE COURT, IT SHALL BE IN THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT TO INTERPRET AS
MUCH OF THESE AS APPEARS NECESSARY

• REMARKS RESPECTING DEMEANOUR OF WITNESS. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 280 THE PRESIDING JUDGE OR
THE MAGISTRATE CAN RECORD THE REMARKS IF ANY AS HE THINKS MATERIAL RESPECTING THE DEMEANOUR OF WITNESS
WHILE HE IS UNDER EXAMINATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECORDING EVIDENCE.

• RECORD OF EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED. AS PER SECTION 281 OF CRPC, WHENEVER THE ACCUSED IS EXAMINED BY A
MAGISTRATE OR BY A COURT OF SESSION, THE WHOLE OF SUCH EXAMINATION INCLUDING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
SHALL BE RECORDED IN FULL BY THE PRESIDING JUDGE OR MAGISTRATE BY HIMSELF IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE ACCUSED
OR IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COURT. THE RECORD WILL BE SHOWN TO THE ACCUSED AND CORRECTIONS ARE MADE IF
NECESSARY AND IT SHALL THEREAFTER BE SIGNED BY THE PRESIDING JUDGE OR MAGISTRATE. THIS SECTION IS NOT
APPLICABLE TO THE EXAMINATION OF AN ACCUSED IN SUMMARY TRIAL. THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF
V YADAV V. REENA YADAV 12 CLARIFIED THAT THE STATEMENT OF ACCUSED UNDER THIS PROVISION IS NOT THE EVIDENCE
OF THE ACCUSED AND IT CANNOT BE READ AS PART OF EVIDENCE.
• THE ACCUSED HAS AN OPTION TO EXAMINE HIMSELF AS A WITNESS. WHERE THE ACCUSED DOES NOT EXAMINE HIMSELF
AS A WITNESS, HIS STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 281 CRPC CANNOT BE READ AS EVIDENCE OF THE ACCUSED AND IT HAS TO
BE LOOKED INTO ONLY AS AN EXPLANATION OF THE INCRIMINATING CIRCUMSTANCE AND NOT AS EVIDENCE.
• INTERPRETER. SECTION 282 STATES THAT WHEN THE SERVICES OF AN INTERPRETER ARE REQUIRED BY ANY CRIMINAL
COURT FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF ANY EVIDENCE OR STATEMENT HE SHALL BE BOUND TO STATE THE TRUE
INTERPRETATION OF SUCH EVIDENCE OR STATEMENT.
• RECORD IN HIGH COURT. AS PER SECTION 283 EVERY HIGH COURT MAY BY GENERAL RULE PRESCRIBE THE MANNER IN
WHICH THE EVIDENCE OF WITNESS AND THE EXAMINATION OF THE ACCUSED SHALL BE TAKEN DOWN IN CASES COMING
BEFORE IT
 CONCLUSION
• THE FORCE OF JUDGMENT IS BROUGHT OUT BY THE RECORDING OF
EVIDENCES. THE MODE OF RECORDING AND TAKING EVIDENCES IS
CRUCIAL AND INTEGRAL FEATURE OF CRIMINAL TRIAL. THE COURT
CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCES AND DECIDES UPON THE CASES THROUGH
THE EYES OF TRIAL JUDGES.
• SET PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN LAID DOWN IN CRPC VIDE
CHAPTER XXIII, PART A FROM SECTIONS 272 TOM 283 FOR TAKING DOWN
EVIDENCE IN INQUIRIES AND TRIAL. THE EVIDENCE GATHERED DURING
THE TRIAL IS BASIS FOR THE DECISION PRONOUNCED BY THE PRESIDING
JUDGE OR THE MAGISTRATE.
• IT IS THEREFORE ESSENTIAL THAT THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN FOR
TAKING DOWN OF EVIDENCE AS DESCRIBED ABOVE ARE FOLLOWED IN
LETTER AND SPIRIT. ADHERING TO THE LAID DOWN PROCEDURES TO THE
UTMOST EXTENT POSSIBLE ENSURE FAIR TRIAL TO THE ACCUSED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IT
WILL ALSO ENSURE THAT ALL SECTIONS OF THE SOCIETY FROM THE
RICHES TO THE POOR ARE TREATED AS EQUAL BEFORE THE JUDICIARY.