Law and You >Procedural Laws > BNSS > Trial before a Court of Session (Ss. 248 to 260 BNSS)

In all cases committed for trial by a Court of Session, the State should be entered as prosecutor, and the complainant as a witness. The charge should be framed with care, and in strict accordance with the provisions of Section 244 BNSS and should describe the offence with which the accused is charged as nearly as possible in the words of the law which creates that offence, so that the accused may have full knowledge of the offence charges against him. If it is intended to prove a previous conviction at the trial, such previous conviction should be set out in the charge in the manner described in the Sanhita.

Chapter XIX of the BNSS titled Trial before a Court of Session containing Sections 248 to 260 give provisions for the trial before the Court of Session. The offences that will be tried by which specific court are provided under The First Schedule of BNSSC. In cases where the crimes carry penalty of death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment exceeding seven years, the trial takes place in a Sessions Court after Magistrate takes cognizance and commits it to Session Court.

Once the Police Report is filed, competent magistrate takes cognizance of the case and if it is found that the case is triable by the Court of Session then it is committed to it under Section 232 BNSS. The Committing Magistrate as soon as he decides to commit a case, should inform the Public Prosecutor and Session Judge, sending them a brief statement showing the section under which the accused is charged and the number of witnesses and giving his own estimate of the time likely to be required for the trial.

When a commitment is made, the Magistrate should notify the fact and transmit the following papers to the Court of Session:—

• The record of the original enquiry, including the order of commitment made according to provision of the Sanhita and a copy of the original charge framed.
• The reasons for commitment; and
• any weapon or other article of property necessary for production in evidence.

If the offense is not exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the case may be transferred to a Magistrate.

Initial Steps in Trial:

A Court of Session is the court which deals with sessions criminal cases and passes any sentence including death at the division session. All cases punishable by more than 10 years of imprisonment are trial by session court.

According to S. 213 BNSS, Court of Session cannot take cognizance of an offence directly but the Court of Session is permitted to take cognizance of an offence without a case being committed to it if the Magistrate commits the case to it or if it acts as a special Court. A magistrate initially has to take cognizance of the offence even in serious criminal case under S. 210 BNSS and the right to exercise the power relating to Bail/Remand. Magisterial court thereafter on due examination of the seriousness of the offence commits the serious case to the Court of Session under S. 232 BNSS by sending case to the Court of Session by sending the record of the case along with the connected articles if it is triable exclusively by the Court of Session.

Trial by the Public Prosecutor (S. 248 BNSS):

Trial to be Conducted by Public Prosecutor:

In every trial before a Court of Session, the prosecution shall be conducted by a Public Prosecutor.

Every Sessions trial must be conducted by a Public Prosecutor appointed under Section 18 of the BNSS, who represents the state and ensures the prosecution is fair and impartial. The prosecutor handles all aspects of presenting the case against the accused. This provision ensures professional handling of serious cases, preventing private prosecutions and maintaining state oversight. The accused may appear physically or via electronic means (e.g., video conferencing).

Opening of the Case S. 249 BNSS:

Opening Case for Prosecution:

When the accused appears or is brought before the Court, in pursuance of a commitment of the case under section 232, or under any other law for the time being in force, the prosecutor shall open his case by describing the charge brought against the accused and stating by what evidence he proposes to prove the guilt of the accused.

When the magistrate commits a case under S. 232 BNSS to the Court of Session and the accused appears or is brought before the Court (physically or electronically), the Public Prosecutor appointed under Section 18 of the BNSS, who represents the state is required under S. 249 BNSS to open his case by explaining the charge against the accused and also states the evidence by which he will prove the guilt of the accused. At this stage, full details of the evidence need not be stated. The opening of the prosecution case must only be to matters which are necessary to follow the evidence.

This step provides a clear overview of the prosecution’s strategy, allowing the defence to prepare accordingly. It sets the foundation for the trial, ensuring transparency.

Discharge (S. 250 BNSS):

Discharge:

(1) The accused may prefer an application for discharge within a period of sixty days from the date of commitment of the case under section 232.

(2) If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing.

According to Section 250(1) BNSS, the accused may file an application for discharge within 60 days of the case’s committal.

According to Section 250(2) BNSS, the Judge reviews the case records (Sections 181 and 182 BNSS), documents (FIR etc.), and hears arguments from both the prosecution and defence. If no sufficient grounds exist to presume the accused committed the offense, the Judge discharges the accused, recording detailed reasons. If grounds exist, the trial proceeds. This Section acts as a safeguard against frivolous prosecutions, preventing unnecessary trials and harassment. The Judge must evaluate if a prima facie case is made out.

In State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi, AIR 2005 SC 359 case, the Supreme Court (SC) held that Section 227 CrPC (S. 250 BNSS) was incorporated to save the accused from prolonged harassment which is a necessary concomitant of a protracted criminal trial.

In State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh AIR 1997 SC 2018 case, the Supreme Court observed that at this juncture, the focus remains on the plausibility of conviction rather than meticulous assessment of evidence.

In State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy, AIR 1977 SC 1489 case, the Court said that the object of S. 227 CrPC (S. 250 BNSS), is to enable the superior Court to examine the correctness of the reasons for which the Sessions Judge has held that there is not sufficient ground  for proceeding against the accused.

In Sushil Ansal v. State, 2002 CrLJ 1369 (Del)  case, the Court held that an order of discharge may be passed only where Court is almost certain that there is no prospect of conviction and that time of the Court need not be wasted holding a trial. Before framing the charge, the Court need not undertake an elaborate enquiry. It only needs to consider whether no sufficient grounds exist for proceeding against the accused. If it is so found, the accused will be discharged, otherwise charge shall be framed and the accused will be put to trial. It can be said that discharge is the suspension of trial.

In Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal, 1979 SCC (Cri) 609, 613 case, the Supreme Court laid down the following principals that Judges need to keep in mind while exercising the power of discharge:

1. The Judge while considering the question of discharging the accused has undoubted power to weigh and scale the evidence for the purpose of finding whether the prima facie case against the accused has been made out or not.
2. If a material in case shows grave suspicion against the accused which has not been properly explained, the court will be justified in framing charge and proceeding with the trial.
3. The test to determine a prima facie case depends on case to case and a universal rule cannot be applied. In such cases the Judge has discretion to try the case.
4. Court can in no circumstance act merely as post office or a mouthpiece of the prosecution, but has to consider the broad probabilities of the case, the total effect of the evidence and documents produced before it.  The Judge should make a roving inquiry into the pros and cons of the matter and weigh the evidence in conducting the trial.

S. 251 BNSS:

Framing of Charge:

(1) If, after such consideration and hearing as aforesaid, the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which—

(a) is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session, he may, frame a charge against the accused and, by order, transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or any other Judicial Magistrate of the first class and direct the accused to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or the Judicial Magistrate of the first class, on such date as he deems fit, and thereupon such Magistrate shall try the offence in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted on a police report;

(b) is exclusively triable by the Court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused within a period of sixty days from the date of first hearing on charge.

(2) Where the Judge frames any charge under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the charge shall be read and explained to the accused present either physically or through audio-video electronic means and the accused shall be asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried.

According to Section 251(1) BNSS, after considering the record of the case and after hearing the parties, if the Judge considers that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which is exclusively triable by the Session Court, that court shall frame in writing charges against the accused.

If the case is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session then the Judge may frame a charge against the accused and by order, transfer the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate of First Class.

According to Section 251(2) BNSS, the charge shall be read and explained to the accused (physically or electronically) and the accused shall be asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claimed to be tried.

At the time of framing the charges, only prima facie case is to be seen; whether case is beyond reasonable doubt, is not to be seen at that stage. At the stage of framing the charge, the court has to see if there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. While evaluating the materials, strict standard of proof is not required; only prima facie case against the accused is to be seen.

The Judge is not required to record detailed reasons for framing charge under Section 251 BNSS if there are sufficient grounds to presume that the accused has committed the offence.

In State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, AIR 1977 SC 2018 case, the Supreme Court said that “… when a case is exclusively triable by the court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused as provided in s. 228 CRPC (S. 251 BNSS). Reading the two provisions together in juxta a position at the initial stage of the trial, the truth, veracity and effect of the evidence which the prosecutor proposes to adduce are not to be meticulously judged. Nor is any weight to be attached to the probable defence of the accused. …. The standard of test and judgment which is to be finally applied before recording a finding regarding the guilt or otherwise of accused, is not exactly to be applied at the stage of deciding the matter under s. 227 and 228 CrPC (S. 250 and 251 BNSS). Strong           suspicion against the accused, if it remains in the reasion of suspicion, cannot’ take the place of proof of his guilt at the conclusion of trial. But at the initial stage, if there is a strong suspicion which leads the court to think that there is a ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence then it is not open to the court to say that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. It is only for the purpose of deciding prima facie whether the court should proceed with the trial or no. The evidence which the Prosecutor proposes to adduce to prove the guilt of the accused even if fully accepted before it is challenged in cross-examination or rebutted by the defence evidence, if any, cannot show that the accused committed the offence, then there will be no sufficient ground for proceeding with  the trial….”

In Rukmini Narvekar v. Vijay Satardekar, AIR 2009 SC 1013 case, the Supreme Court observed that no provision in the Code (sanhita) gives the accused the right to file any material or document at the stage of framing of charge. The right is only granted at the stage of the trial.

In Banwari vs State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1962 SC 1198 case, where it was argued that the learned Sessions Judge did not read over and explain the charges framed by the Magistrate. The Supreme Court held that this omission on his part, however, does not vitiate, the trial when it is not shown that any prejudice has resulted to the appellants on account of this omission.

In Kanti Bhadra Shah v. State of West Bengal, (2000) 1 SC 722 case, the Supreme Court said that while exercising power under Section 228 CrPC, the Judge is not required to record his reasons for framing the charges against the accused.

This Section formalizes the accusations, ensuring the accused understands them fully. It must be specific and supported by evidence.

Conviction on Plea of Guilty (S. 252 BNSS):

Conviction on Plea of Guilty:

If the accused pleads guilty, the Judge shall record the plea and may, in his discretion, convict him thereon.

“Plead Guilty” means to take responsibility for or to confess to a crime that one has committed. As per Section 252 BNSS, if the accused pleads guilty, the Judge records the plea verbatim and may convict the accused at their discretion, ensuring the plea is voluntary.

The accused may plead guilty under S. 252 BNSS or he can refuse to plead. The Court under Section 252 BNSS has the discretion to accept the plea of guilty. This discretion has to be applied with care and not arbitrarily. Also, the Judge has to ensure that the plea has been made voluntarily and not under any inducement otherwise it would be violative of the Provisions of the Constitution of India. When an accused pleads guilty then the Judge shall convict him as per his discretion and shall record the same. The Court cannot convict an accused on the basis of the plea of guilty where the offence is of a nature in which the punishment is death or imprisonment for life. The right of appeal of the accused is curtailed by Section 375 If the accused is convicted on the basis of his plea of guilty.

In Queen Empress v. Bhadu, (1897) ILR 19 All 119 case, the Allahabad High Court held that the plea of guilty must be in unambiguous terms otherwise such a plea is considered as equivalent to a plea of not guilty.

In Hasaruddin Mohommad v. Emperor, AIR 1928 Cal 775 case, the Calcutta High Court held that it will be reluctant for the Court to convict a person accused of an offence in which the punishment is death or life imprisonment on the basis of his plea of guilty.

In Chekkutty v. State of Kerala, 2024 KLT OnLine 1469 case, Justice P. Somarajan observed that the right to plead guilty shall not be used as a device to get a lesser sentence. In the case of pleading guilty by the accused, the court should not adopt a liberal approach and no concession can be given simply on the reason that the accused pleaded guilty in the matter of awarding sentence. On the other hand, the sentence should reflect a proper balance.

Date of Prosecution Evidence (S. 253 BNSS):

Date for Prosecution Evidence:

If the accused refuses to plead, or does not plead, or claims to be tried or is not convicted under section 252, the Judge shall fix a date for the examination of witnesses, and may, on the application of the prosecution, issue any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or other thing.

Under S. 253 BNSS, the Judge will fix a date for the examination of witnesses if the accused has refused to plead guilty or does not plead guilty, or if he claims to be tried or if he is not convicted under Section 252 BNSS. On an application of the prosecution, the Judge will issue a process for compelling the attendance of witnesses or to produce any document or any other thing. This transitions the trial to evidence presentation, ensuring all necessary materials are available.

Prosecution Evidence (S. 254 BNSS):

Evidence for Prosecution:

(1) On the date so fixed, the Judge shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution: Provided that evidence of a witness under this sub-section may be recorded by audio-video electronic means.

(2) The deposition of evidence of any public servant may be taken through audio-video electronic means.

(3) The Judge may, in his discretion, permit the cross-examination of any witness to be deferred until any other witness or witnesses have been examined or recall any witness for further cross-examination.

According to Section 308 BNSS, except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his advocate including through audio-video electronic means at the designated place to be notified by the State Government.

S. 142 Bharatiya Sakshya Ashiniyam, 2023 states that the examination of a witness shall be done by the party who calls him (prosecution) and it shall be called examination-in-chief. The cross-examination of the witness is done by the adverse party (defence). The re-examination is done subsequent to cross-examination by the prosecution 

S. 143 Bharatiya Sakshya Ashiniyam, 2023 lays down the order of examination of the witnesses. It says that the witness should be first examined in chief and then cross-examined. The examination in chief is done by the party who calls the witness and cross-examination is done by the adverse party. If the party who called the witness so desires, can re-examine the witness with the permission of the Court.

According to Sections 142 and 143 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the examination of a witness to be done by the party who calls him (examination-in-chief), after examination –in-chief, the examination of a witness is done by the adverse party (cross-examination). The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross-examination, by the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination by permission of the Court.

On the scheduled date, the prosecution examines witnesses and presents evidence. Witnesses are cross-examined by the defence. Evidence, including testimonies, must be recorded via audio-video means where practicable. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, presenting all material witnesses. Audio-video recording enhances reliability and allows for review.

According to Section 254(1) BNSS, on the date fixed under Section 253 BNSS, the Court shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution.

According to Section 254(2) BNSS, the court may permit the deposition of evidence of any public servant may be taken through audio-video electronic means.

According to Section 254(3) BNSS, the court may permit the cross examination of any witness to be deferred until any other witness has been examined or recall any witness for further cross examination.

In Habeeb Mohammad v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1954 SC 51 case, the Supreme Court held that it is the duty of the prosecution to examine all material witnesses essential for unfolding the prosecution story, whether in the result the effect of that testimony is for or against the case for the prosecution.

Steps under S. 254 BNSS:

Step 1: Examination of in Chief of witness by the prosecution

Step 2: Cross Examination by adverse party

Step 3: Re-examination of Witness by the permission of the Court (Optional)

In each of the above step, the Court shall record evidence under S. 311 BNSS. According to Section 313 BNSS, as the evidence of each witness taken under Section 310 or Section 311 BNSS is completed, it shall be read over to the witness in the presence of the accused, if in attendance, or of his pleader, if he appears by pleader, and shall, if necessary, be corrected.

According to Section 352 BNSS, any party in a trial to submit a memorandum of arguments after the close of their evidence. This memorandum, which should be concise and organized, must be shared with the opposing party. The court can also allow or regulate oral arguments and will only grant an adjournment for submitting written arguments if it deems it necessary.

Section 351 BNSS, is a procedural safeguard that allows a court to question an accused person about incriminating evidence presented by the prosecution. The purpose is to provide the accused with an opportunity to explain the facts and circumstances appearing against them, which can be taken into consideration during the trial. Key aspects include the accused’s right to remain silent without penalty, though refusal to answer might lead to an adverse inference.

The Court to put in an enquiry or trial questions to the accused for the purpose of enabling him to explain any of the circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. … failure to do so amounts to a serious irregularity vitiating trial, if it is shown that the accused was prejudiced.

Section 348 BNSS grants any court the power to summon any person as a witness, examine a person already present, or recall and re-examine a witness already examined, if their evidence is deemed essential for the just decision of a case. This power can be exercised at any stage of an inquiry, trial, or other proceeding and is intended to ensure that the truth is uncovered by obtaining the best available evidence. However, this power must be exercised with caution, strong justification, and in a way that does not prejudice any party or constitute an abuse of the legal process. 

In Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1973 SC 2622 case, the Supreme Court said that it is basic that the prisoner’s attention should be attracted to each inculpatory material in order to allow him to clarify.

In Asraf Ali v. State of Assam, 17 July, 2008 case, the Supreme Court held that, if a matter is significant against the accused and the conviction is proposed to be founded on it is correct and legitimate then the accused be examined concerning the issue and be given a chance to clarify it.

Acquittal of Accused (S. 255 BNSS):

Acquittal:

If, after taking the evidence for the prosecution, examining the accused and hearing the prosecution and the defence on the point, the Judge considers that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence, the Judge shall record an order of acquittal.

After prosecution evidence and accused examination (under Section 346), the Judge hears arguments. If no evidence supports guilt, an acquittal order is recorded.

S. 255 BNSS gives an opportunity to both the prosecution and defence to address the court before calling upon the accused to enter upon his defence and to adduce evidence in support of it. The comments of the parties should be related to the evidence given by the prosecution and the examination of the accused. An accused may be acquitted if there is no evidence against him that he has committed the offence. Under Section 255 BNSS the Judge will record an order of acquittal in favour of the accused if he thinks that there is no evidence against the accused that he has committed the offence.

Defefence Evidence (S. 256 BNSS):

Entering upon Defence:

(1) Where the accused is not acquitted under section 255, he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof.

(2) If the accused puts in any written statement, the Judge shall file it with the record.

(3) If the accused applies for the issue of any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or thing, the Judge shall issue such process unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded, that such application should be refused on the ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice.

Section 256 BNSS, deals with the accused’s right to enter upon their defence after the court has found them not to be acquitted. This section mandates that the accused can present evidence, and the court must issue processes to compel the attendance of defence witnesses or the production of documents, unless it’s for vexation, delay, or defeating justice. Witnesses are cross-examined. The accused can also submit a written statement, which the judge will file. 

Section 348 BNSS grants any court the power to summon any person as a witness, examine a person already present, or recall and re-examine a witness already examined, if their evidence is deemed essential for the just decision of a case. This power can be exercised at any stage of an inquiry, trial, or other proceeding and is intended to ensure that the truth is uncovered by obtaining the best available evidence. However, this power must be exercised with caution, strong justification, and in a way that does not prejudice any party or constitute an abuse of the legal process. 

Post-Defence Arguments (S. 257 BNSS):

Arguments:

When the examination of the witnesses (if any) for the defence is complete, the prosecutor shall sum up his case and the accused or his advocate shall be entitled to reply:

Provided that where any point of law is raised by the accused or his advocate, the prosecution may, with the permission of the Judge, make his submissions with regard to such point of law.

Post-defence evidence, the prosecution sums up, and the defence replies. Points of law may be addressed with court permission.

Section 257 BNSS deals with the stage of final arguments in a criminal trial. After the defence has presented its witnesses, the prosecutor summarizes their case, followed by the accused or their lawyer’s right to reply. If the defence raises a legal point, the prosecution can also make submissions on that specific issue with the court’s permission. 

Judgment S. (258 BNSS):

Judgment of Acquittal or Conviction:

(1) After hearing arguments and points of law (if any), the Judge shall give a judgment in the case, as soon as possible, within a period of thirty days from the date of completion of arguments, which may be extended to a period of forty-five days for reasons to be recorded in writing.

(2) If the accused is convicted, the Judge shall, unless he proceeds in accordance with the provisions of section 401, hear the accused on the questions of sentence, and then pass sentence on him according to law.

Section 258 BNSS, governs the judgment of acquittal or conviction and the sentencing process in a criminal trial. After hearing arguments, the judge delivers a judgment. If the accused is convicted, the judge must then hear the accused on the question of sentencing before passing a final sentence. If convicted, sentencing follows, considering factors like prior convictions (heard post-guilt under Section 259). Judgment must be reasoned and uploaded digitally within 7 days.

After hearing the arguments of the prosecution and defence the Court will give judgment in a case. It is the stage where the accused is either acquitted or convicted. As per Section258 BNSS, a Judge will pronounce a judgment of acquittal or conviction after hearing the arguments of both the parties i.e., the prosecution and defence and on point of law (if any).

If the accused is acquitted, the acquittal will be done according to the procedure laid down under Section 255 BNSS and if he is convicted he shall be dealt according to Section 258 BNSS.

After conviction, the Judge will hear the accused and then pass a sentence under Section 258 BNSS. The Judge while passing a sentence shall try to gather all information that influences or relates to the sentence of the accused.

The provisions of Section 258(2) BNSS are mandatory and should be complied with strictly as held by the Court. The purpose of Section 258 BNSS is to offer a chance to the accused to adduce evidence of any mitigating circumstances in his favour. The accused should be explicitly asked with respect to what he needs to state about his sentence and whether he wants to give any proof on his side in order to mitigate his sentence.

In Santa Singh v. State Of Punjab, AIR 1976 SC 2386 case, Bhagwati, J Supreme Court observed under s. 235(1) CrPC (S. 258(1) BNSS) the court must, in the first instance, deliver a judgment convicting or acquitting the accused. If the accused is acquitted, no further question arises.  If              the accused is convicted, at          that stage, he must be given an opportunity to be heard in regard to the sentence, and it is only after hearing him that the court can pass sentence.

Previous Conviction (S. 259 BNSS):

Previous Conviction:

In a case where a previous conviction is charged under the provisions of sub-section (7) of section 234, and the accused does not admit that he has been previously convicted as alleged in the charge, the Judge may, after he has convicted the said accused under section 252 or section 258, take evidence in respect of the alleged previous conviction, and shall record a finding thereon: Provided that no such charge shall be read out by the Judge nor shall the accused be asked to plead thereto nor shall the previous conviction be referred to by the prosecution or in any evidence adduced by it, unless and until the accused has been convicted under section 252 or section 258.

Evidence of prior convictions is considered only post-guilt determination to avoid prejudice. Section 259 BNSS deals with the procedure for handling charges of previous convictions when the accused denies them. It mandates that the charge of previous conviction, often included under Section 234(7) BNSS for enhanced punishment, is not presented to the court until after the accused has been convicted of the primary offense. The prosecution cannot refer to or adduce evidence of the previous conviction unless and until the accused is found guilty of the main charge. 

Trial in Absentia:

Under Section 356 BNSS, if the accused absconds, trial may proceed after 90 days from charge framing, with warrants and notices.

S. 260 BNSS (Original Jurisdiction of Court of Session)

Procedure in Cases Instituted under Sub-section (2) of Section 222:

(1) A Court of Session taking cognizance of an offence under sub-section (2) of section 222 shall try the case in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted otherwise than on a police report before a Court of Magistrate:

Provided that the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed shall, unless the Court of Session, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs, be examined as a witness for the prosecution.

(2) Every trial under this section shall be held in camera if either party thereto so desires or if the Court thinks fit so to do.

(3) If, in any such case, the Court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of opinion that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation against them or any of them, it may, by its order of discharge or acquittal, direct the person against whom the offence was alleged to have been committed (other than the President, the Vice-President or the Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union territory) to show cause why he should not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused, when there are more than one.

(4) The Court shall record and consider any cause which may be shown by the person so directed, and if it is satisfied that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation, it may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order that compensation to such amount not exceeding five thousand rupees, as it may determine, be paid by such person to the accused or to each or any of them.

(5) Compensation awarded under sub-section (4) shall be recovered as if it were a fine imposed by a Magistrate.

(6) No person who has been directed to pay compensation under sub-section (4) shall, by reason of such order, be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the complaint made under this section:

Provided that any amount paid to an accused person under this section shall be taken into account in awarding compensation to such person in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter.

(7) The person who has been ordered under sub-section (4) to pay compensation may appeal from the order, in so far as it relates to the payment of compensation, to the High Court.

(8) When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made, the compensation shall not be paid to him before the period allowed for the presentation of the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal is presented, before the appeal has been decided.

Section 260 BNSS outlines the procedure for a Court of Session to conduct trials for cases instituted under Section 222(2) BNSS. These are specific offences, such as defamation against high-ranking officials, that can be taken cognizance of directly by the Court of Session. The trial follows the procedure for warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report, which includes provisions for the complainant to be examined as a witness and for the court to hold the trial in camera if needed. 

Under Section 222(2) BNSS, notwithstanding anything contained in this Sanhita, when any offence falling under section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is alleged to have been committed against a person who, at the time of such commission, is the President of India, the Vice-President of India, the Governor of a State, the Administrator of a Union territory or a Minister of the Union or of a State or of a Union territory, or any other public servant employed in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State in respect of his conduct in the discharge of his public functions, a Court of Session may take cognizance of such offence, without the case being committed to it, upon a complaint in writing made by the Public Prosecutor.

Procedure in Cases Instituted Under S. 199(2):

• Trial Procedure: A Court of Session taking cognizance of an offence under sub sec. (2) of sec 222 shall try the case in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report before a court of magistrate.
• In-Camera Trial: Every trial under this section shall be held in camera if either party thereto so desires or if the court thinks fit so to do.
• Compensation for Unfounded Accusations: If, in any such case, the court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of the Opinion that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation against them or any of them, it may try its order of discharge or acquittal, directs the person against whom the offence was alleged to have been committed to show cause why he should not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused, when there are more than one.
• Determining Compensation: The court shall record and consider any cause which may be shown by the person so directed and if it is satisfied that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation, it may make an order that compensation to such amount not exceeding Rs.1000 it may determine, be paid by such person to the accused or to each or any of them.
• Recovery of Compensation: Compensation awarded under sub sec. (4) shall be recovered as if it were a fine imposed by a magistrate.
• No Exemption from Liability: No person directed to pay compensation under sub sec (4) shall be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the compliant made under this section.
• Right to Appeal: The person who has been ordered under sub sec. (4) to pay compensation may appeal to the High Court.
• Payment Timing: When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made, the compensation shall not be paid to him before the period allowed for the presentation of the appeal has elapsed, or if an appeal is presented, before the appeal has been decided.

Conclusion:

A trial before a Court of Session is a vital component of our legal system. It’s where serious criminal cases are heard, such as murder and rape, ensuring justice is served. The trial before a Court of Session guarantees that evidence is carefully examined, witnesses are heard and legal procedures are followed. The Court of Session, as a higher court, plays a crucial role in delivering a fair and impartial verdict. This not only protects the rights of the accused but also maintains public trust in the legal system.

For More Articles on BNSS Click Here

For More Articles on Different Acts, Click Here