Criminal Procedure | Updated October 2026
Section 353 CrPC Judgment - Section 392 BNSS Explained
Section 353 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) governed the pronouncement of judgments in criminal trials. Its corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), is Section 392, which retains the open-court requirement and introduces a 45-day time limit and provisions for online publication and electronic appearance.
What is a judgment under criminal procedure?
A judgment is the court's formal decision concluding a criminal trial, ordinarily stating whether the accused is convicted or acquitted and, where applicable, the sentence. Section 392 BNSS regulates how and when the judgment is pronounced. The separate rules governing its language and contents are in Section 393 BNSS (formerly Section 354 CrPC).
Section 392 BNSS: Procedure for pronouncing judgment
Subsection (1): Open court and 45-day limit
Every judgment in a trial before a criminal court of original jurisdiction must be pronounced in open court immediately after the trial ends or at a later notified time not later than 45 days. The presiding officer may deliver the entire judgment, read it out, or read its operative portion and explain its substance in a language understood by the accused or the advocate.
Subsections (2) and (3): Written record and signatures
Where the whole judgment is delivered orally, the presiding officer must arrange for a shorthand record, sign the transcript and its pages when prepared, and record the date of delivery in open court. Where the judgment or its operative portion is read aloud, it must be dated and signed in open court; pages not written personally by the presiding officer must also be signed.
Subsection (4): Access to the judgment
When only the operative part is read and the substance explained, the complete judgment or a copy must immediately be available to the parties or their advocates for inspection without charge. The court must also, as far as practicable, upload a copy of the judgment to its portal within seven days of the judgment.
Subsections (5) and (6): Presence of the accused
An accused person in custody must be brought to hear the pronouncement, either physically or through audio-video electronic means. An accused who is not in custody is generally required to attend, except where personal attendance was dispensed with during trial and the outcome is acquittal or a fine-only sentence. Where there are multiple accused and some are absent, the court may pronounce judgment despite their absence to prevent undue delay.
Subsections (7) and (8): Irregularities and saving
A judgment is not invalid merely because a party or advocate was absent at pronouncement or because notice of the date or place was omitted or defective. This rule does not curtail the application of Section 511 BNSS, dealing with the effect of errors, omissions and irregularities.
Section 353 CrPC, 1973: Original statutory framework
The earlier provision contained eight subsections and required judgments to be pronounced in open court after trial, either by delivering or reading the whole judgment or by reading the operative part with an explanation. It also prescribed recording, dating, signing, access to the full judgment, presence of the accused, and treatment of procedural irregularities.
- Section 353(1): Open-court pronouncement immediately or at a later notified time, by one of the three prescribed methods; the provision did not expressly specify the new 45-day outer limit.
- Section 353(2): Shorthand transcription, signature on the transcript and pages, and dating when the whole judgment was delivered.
- Section 353(3): Dating and signing in open court when the judgment or operative portion was read out.
- Section 353(4): Immediate, free access for inspection where only the operative portion was read and explained.
- Section 353(5): An accused in custody was to be brought to hear the judgment.
- Section 353(6): Attendance of an accused not in custody, with exceptions for acquittal or fine-only sentences where personal attendance was dispensed with; judgment could be pronounced despite absence of some co-accused to avoid delay.
- Section 353(7): Absence of a party or advocate, or defects in notice, did not by themselves invalidate judgment.
- Section 353(8): The provision did not limit Section 465 CrPC concerning errors, omissions and irregularities.
Jharkhand state amendment under the former CrPC
The original article recorded Jharkhand Act 2 of 2016, Section 5, which amended Section 353(5) CrPC in its application to Jharkhand by providing for an accused in custody to be brought before the court in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage. This historical state amendment is preserved here for reference. Under the BNSS, Section 392(5) expressly provides for physical appearance or audio-video electronic means. The applicability of any state-specific provision to a particular proceeding should be checked against current state notifications and saving provisions.
Key changes under Section 392 BNSS
| Issue | Section 353 CrPC | Section 392 BNSS |
|---|---|---|
| Pronouncement deadline | Immediately or at a later notified time | Immediately or within 45 days after termination of trial |
| Upload of judgment | No corresponding express seven-day portal-upload proviso | Upload within seven days, as far as practicable |
| Accused in custody | To be brought to hear judgment, subject to applicable amendments | May attend in person or by audio-video electronic means |
| Errors and irregularities | Reference to Section 465 CrPC | Reference to Section 511 BNSS |
Practical significance
The provisions protect transparency by requiring public pronouncement, notice to parties, and access to the written judgment. The new time limit is intended to reduce delay. However, questions about the legal consequences of missing a deadline or a procedural defect depend on the statutory scheme and applicable judicial decisions; a delay should not automatically be treated as making a judgment void.
Frequently asked questions
Which BNSS section corresponds to Section 353 CrPC?
Section 392 BNSS is the corresponding provision governing pronouncement of criminal judgments.
Must a criminal judgment be pronounced in open court?
Yes. Section 392(1) requires pronouncement in open court by the presiding officer using one of the prescribed methods.
What is the time limit under the BNSS?
Section 392(1) requires immediate pronouncement after termination of the trial or at a later notified time not exceeding 45 days.
Must the court upload the judgment within seven days?
Section 392(4) provides that the court shall, as far as practicable, upload a copy on its portal within seven days of the date of judgment.
Can an accused in custody hear judgment by video link?
Yes. Section 392(5) permits attendance in person or through audio-video electronic means.
Official legislation and references
- India Code: Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (see Sections 392, 393, 511 and 531).
- Bureau of Police Research and Development: BNSS text (PDF).
- BPR&D: New criminal laws and reference material.
- National Crime Records Bureau: Corresponding sections of CrPC and BNSS.
This article is general legal information. Check the applicable statute, state amendments, transitional provisions and court orders for individual cases.