Criminal Procedure Law | Updated 18 October 2026
CrPC Section 317 - Inquiry or Trial in the Absence of the Accused
Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 permits a criminal court, subject to safeguards, to dispense with the accused person's physical attendance during an inquiry or trial. The corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is Section 355.
Meaning and purpose of Section 317 CrPC
The provision balances the need for an accused person to participate in criminal proceedings with the court's power to prevent unnecessary delay. It allows the court to excuse personal attendance where attendance is not necessary in the interests of justice, or where the accused persistently disturbs the proceedings, provided the accused is represented by a pleader.
Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Statutory provision
Sub-section (1)
At any stage of an inquiry or trial under this Code, if the Judge or Magistrate is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded, that the personal attendance of the accused before the Court is not necessary in the interests of justice, or that the accused persistently disturbs the proceedings in Court, the Judge or Magistrate may, if the accused is represented by a pleader, dispense with his attendance and proceed with such inquiry or trial in his absence, and may, at any subsequent stage of the proceedings, direct the personal attendance of such accused.
Sub-section (2)
If the accused in any such case is not represented by a pleader, or if the Judge or Magistrate considers his personal attendance necessary, he may, if he thinks fit and for reasons to be recorded by him, either adjourn such inquiry or trial, or order that the case of such accused be taken up or tried separately.
BNSS Section 355 - Current corresponding law
Section 355(1) authorises the Judge or Magistrate, after recording reasons, to dispense with the accused's attendance when it is unnecessary in the interests of justice or when the accused persistently disturbs court proceedings, provided the accused is represented by an advocate. The court may subsequently require personal attendance.
Section 355(2) permits the court, for recorded reasons, to adjourn the inquiry or trial or direct a separate proceeding when the accused is unrepresented or the court considers personal attendance necessary.
Explanation to Section 355: Personal attendance of the accused includes attendance through audio-video electronic means. This express clarification is part of the central BNSS provision.
Read the official government-hosted BNSS text (PDF) and the Ministry of Home Affairs new criminal laws resource.
When can personal attendance be dispensed with?
- The Judge or Magistrate must assess the circumstances and record reasons.
- Attendance must be unnecessary in the interests of justice, or the accused must be persistently disrupting the proceedings.
- The accused must be represented by a pleader under the CrPC or an advocate under the BNSS for the exemption contemplated by sub-section (1).
- The exemption is discretionary, not an automatic right, and can be withdrawn by requiring attendance at a later stage.
- Where representation is absent or attendance is necessary, the court may adjourn or order separate proceedings, recording reasons.
Gujarat State Amendment to CrPC Section 317
The Gujarat amendment inserted an Explanation into Section 317 providing that, for the purpose of that section, personal attendance of the accused includes attendance through electronic video linkage as provided in Section 273. The amendment was enacted through Gujarat Act 31 of 2017, Section 6.
This is relevant to the CrPC as amended in Gujarat, subject to the applicable commencement and savings rules. The BNSS now contains a central Explanation under Section 355 expressly recognising audio-video electronic attendance; the Gujarat amendment should not be presented as a separate nationwide amendment to the BNSS.
Difference between BNSS Sections 355 and 356
Section 355 addresses dispensation of attendance in certain inquiries or trials where the accused is represented by an advocate. Section 356 is a distinct provision governing inquiry, trial or judgment in the absence of a proclaimed offender, subject to separate statutory conditions and safeguards. An ordinary exemption from appearance under Section 355 is not equivalent to a trial in absentia under Section 356.
The Bureau of Police Research and Development guidance on trial in absentia explains these provisions.
Practical application
An accused who cannot attend a particular hearing may request exemption through their advocate, explaining why personal presence is unnecessary at that stage. The court considers the nature of the hearing, the interests of justice, and whether participation through permitted electronic means is suitable. It may grant or refuse the request and may later require attendance. An exemption should not be assumed merely because an application has been filed.
Frequently asked questions
Is the accused required to attend every hearing?
Not necessarily. Under Section 317 CrPC or Section 355 BNSS, as applicable, the court may dispense with attendance where the statutory requirements are satisfied.
Can the court require the accused to appear after granting an exemption?
Yes. Both provisions expressly permit the court to direct personal attendance at a subsequent stage.
Can appearance through video conferencing count as personal attendance?
Yes, the Explanation to BNSS Section 355 includes attendance through audio-video electronic means, subject to the applicable court directions and procedure.
Does Section 317 CrPC still apply after 1 July 2024?
It may continue to govern proceedings saved by BNSS Section 531. The commencement date and procedural status of the particular case matter.
Related statutory resources
See the CrPC section index, Section 315 CrPC on the accused as a witness, and Section 318 CrPC on an accused unable to understand proceedings.