Source: Punjab & Haryana High 

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar has held that a Magistrate's failure to sign witness depositions in a warrant case under Section 275(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 CrPC (Section 310 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)) is fatal to the prosecution.  

• The Punjab & Haryana High Court held this in the matter of Rajender Singh v. State of Haryana (2025). 
• The court states that unsigned testimonies cannot be considered evidence, impacting the entire case. 

What was the Background of Rajender Singh v. State of Haryana Case? 

• The case originated from a complaint filed by a female teacher at a Government School against two fellow teachers (the petitioners). 
• The complainant alleged harassment by the petitioner-teachers. 
• In one specific incident, the complainant alleged that the petitioners pushed her into a room and attempted to close the door with the intention to outrage her modesty. 
• The complainant managed to escape from the situation. 
• The accused were charged under Sections 294 and 357 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC). 
• The JMIC convicted the accused and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months along with a fine of Rs. 3,000. 
• The accused filed an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, which was dismissed. 
• Subsequently, the accused filed a revision plea seeking to set aside both the conviction order and the dismissal of appeal. 
• ASI Rajbir Singh, who prepared the site plan and partly investigated the matter, did not appear for cross-examination. 
• Two Investigating Officers, both named Rajbir Singh, conducted the investigation in this case. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The High Court states that non-signing of witness depositions by a Magistrate in a warrant case under Section 275 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) is fatal to the prosecution's case. 
• The Court held that Section 275(4) CrPC mandates that any evidence taken by the jurisdictional Magistrate in written form must be signed by him to be considered as evidence. 
• The Court observed that failure to comply with Section 275(4) CrPC is not merely an inconsequential irregularity but impacts the entire prosecution. 
• The Court noted that testimony recorded in a warrant case without following Section 275(4) CrPC cannot be read into evidence. 
• The Court observed that all evidence collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation must be proved in accordance with law. 
• The Court observed that denial of cross-examination opportunity violates:  
  • The right to free and fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.  
  • The principles of natural justice. 
  • The Court found that the deposition of the second Investigating Officer (PW5) was not signed and endorsed by the jurisdictional Court, making it unreliable. 
• The Court held that testimony cannot be read into evidence until the opposite party is granted an opportunity for cross-examination. 

What is Section 310 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023? 

• The Section applies specifically to warrant cases being tried before a Magistrate. 
• This section essentially establishes the procedural requirements for recording witness testimony in warrant cases, ensuring proper documentation and authentication of evidence. 
• Recording of Evidence:  
  • The evidence must be recorded in writing as the examination of each witness proceeds. 
  • The recording can be done in three ways:  
    • By the Magistrate personally. 
    • Under the Magistrate's dictation in open Court. 
    • By a Court officer appointed by the Magistrate, if the Magistrate is physically incapacitated or unable to record. 
• Alternative Recording Method:  
  • Evidence can also be recorded through audio-video electronic means. 
  • This must be done in the presence of the accused person's advocate. 
• Magistrate's Certificate Requirement:  
  • If the Magistrate doesn't personally record the evidence. 
  • They must record a certificate explaining why they couldn't take down the evidence themselves. 
• Format of Recording:  
  • The evidence should normally be recorded in narrative form. 
  • However, the Magistrate has discretion to record any part in question-and-answer format. 
• Authentication Requirement:  
  • The recorded evidence must be signed by the Magistrate. 
  • Only after signing does it become part of the official court record. 
• Mandatory Nature:  
  • The signing requirement is not optional. 
  • The evidence must form part of the permanent court record.