Introduction
Section 267 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with evidence for the prosecution in cases instituted otherwise than on a police report.
This section applies to a different category of warrant-cases from those covered by Section 265.
While Section 265 deals with prosecution evidence in a case instituted on a police report, Section 267 deals with prosecution evidence where the case has been instituted otherwise than on a police report.
This distinction is important because the procedure followed by the Magistrate differs depending on how the case was instituted.
Meaning of Section 267
Section 267 lays down the procedure for recording prosecution evidence in a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report.
At this stage, the prosecution presents its evidence before the Magistrate.
The accused gets an opportunity to:
- participate in the proceedings;
- cross-examine prosecution witnesses; and
- challenge the evidence produced against them.
The provision therefore establishes the procedure through which the prosecution attempts to prove its case in a privately instituted or otherwise non-police-report warrant case.
Object and Purpose of Section 267
The main objectives of Section 267 are:
- To provide a proper procedure for recording prosecution evidence.
- To allow the prosecution or complainant to present witnesses and other evidence.
- To give the accused an opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses.
- To ensure that the evidence against the accused is tested before the Court.
- To provide a fair and orderly trial procedure.
- To ensure that the Court reaches its decision after considering properly recorded evidence.
When Does Section 267 Apply?
The most important point is that Section 267 applies to a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report.
The distinction can be remembered as:
Section 265 → Case instituted on police report
Section 267 → Case instituted otherwise than on police report
This difference is important for understanding the structure of warrant-case trials before Magistrates.
Meaning of “Otherwise Than on a Police Report”
A case instituted otherwise than on a police report generally refers to a case where the proceedings are initiated through a complaint or another legally recognised mode, rather than through a police report submitted after investigation.
In such a case, the prosecution evidence is dealt with under the procedure prescribed for cases not instituted on a police report.
Procedure Under Section 267
The broad procedure can be understood in the following manner:
Case instituted otherwise than on police report
↓
Prosecution evidence
↓
Witnesses examined
↓
Accused gets opportunity to cross-examine
↓
Court considers prosecution evidence
↓
Further trial stages
The prosecution must present the evidence supporting the charge before the Magistrate.
Prosecution Evidence
The prosecution may produce evidence in support of the charge.
This can include:
1. Oral Evidence
Witnesses may appear before the Court and give evidence regarding the facts relevant to the case.
2. Documentary Evidence
Relevant documents may be produced and proved according to law.
3. Material Evidence
Where relevant, physical objects or other material may be produced before the Court.
4. Other Admissible Evidence
Other forms of evidence permitted by law may also be relied upon.
Examination of Prosecution Witnesses
The prosecution witnesses are examined before the Magistrate.
The normal structure of witness examination includes:
- Examination-in-chief
- Cross-examination
- Re-examination, where necessary
The purpose is to place the prosecution’s version before the Court and allow the defence to test that version.
Examination-in-Chief
The prosecution first examines its witness.
During examination-in-chief, the witness gives evidence concerning facts relevant to the prosecution case.
For example, a complainant may produce a witness who allegedly saw the incident.
The witness may then testify about:
- what they observed;
- when they observed it;
- where the event occurred; and
- other relevant circumstances.
Cross-Examination
After the prosecution witness gives evidence, the accused gets an opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
Cross-examination is a fundamental part of the criminal trial.
The defence may use it to:
- test the accuracy of the testimony;
- expose contradictions;
- challenge credibility;
- identify inconsistencies;
- question the witness’s ability to observe the event;
- bring out omissions; and
- place the defence version before the witness where legally appropriate.
Thus:
Prosecution examines → Defence cross-examines
Re-Examination
After cross-examination, the prosecution may re-examine the witness where necessary.
Re-examination is generally intended to clarify matters arising during cross-examination.
It does not provide an unlimited opportunity to introduce an entirely new case through the witness.
Right of the Accused to Cross-Examine
The opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses is an important safeguard for the accused.
The prosecution’s evidence must be tested through the adversarial process before the Court reaches its final conclusion.
The accused can therefore challenge:
- credibility;
- consistency;
- reliability;
- accuracy;
- contradictions; and
- other relevant aspects of the prosecution evidence.
Section 267 and Complaint Cases
Section 267 is particularly important in understanding warrant-cases that are instituted otherwise than on a police report.
For example, where a private complaint results in a warrant-case before a Magistrate, the prosecution evidence is governed by the provisions applicable to such cases.
The complainant or prosecution must establish the case through evidence placed before the Court.
Section 265 vs Section 267
This is one of the most important comparisons.
| Section 265 | Section 267 |
|---|---|
| Evidence for prosecution | Evidence for prosecution |
| Case instituted on police report | Case instituted otherwise than on police report |
| Follows the procedure applicable to police-report warrant cases | Follows the procedure applicable to other warrant cases |
| Prosecution evidence is recorded after framing of charge | Prosecution evidence is recorded according to the procedure applicable to such cases |
| Corresponds broadly to Section 242 CrPC | Corresponds broadly to Section 244 CrPC |
Easy Formula
Police report → Section 265
Otherwise than police report → Section 267
Important Difference in Trial Structure
The distinction between Sections 265 and 267 is not merely about the source of the case.
The two procedures have different stages concerning:
- preliminary prosecution evidence;
- consideration of the accused’s case;
- framing of charge; and
- further evidence.
Therefore, students should not treat Section 267 as merely another version of Section 265.
The mode of institution of the case determines which procedural route applies.
Example
Suppose A files a complaint before a Magistrate alleging that B committed a particular offence.
The case is not based upon a police report.
The Magistrate proceeds with the warrant-case according to the applicable procedure.
At the prosecution evidence stage, the complainant/prosecution produces witnesses and documents supporting the allegation.
The witnesses are examined before the Magistrate.
B is given an opportunity to cross-examine them.
The Court then considers the evidence as the case proceeds through the subsequent stages.
Another Example
Suppose C is accused in a warrant-case based on a private complaint.
The complainant produces a witness who claims to have witnessed the alleged offence.
The witness gives evidence before the Magistrate.
C’s defence challenges the testimony through cross-examination, pointing out inconsistencies in the witness’s version.
The Magistrate records the evidence and considers it along with the other material in the case.
Role of the Magistrate
The Magistrate supervises the recording of prosecution evidence and ensures that the proceedings are conducted fairly.
The Magistrate must ensure that:
- relevant evidence is properly recorded;
- witnesses are examined according to law;
- the accused gets an opportunity to cross-examine;
- irrelevant or impermissible material is dealt with appropriately; and
- the trial proceeds in an orderly manner.
The Magistrate must remain impartial while ensuring compliance with procedural requirements.
Prosecution Must Prove the Case
The mere filing of a complaint does not establish the guilt of the accused.
The complainant or prosecution must establish the necessary ingredients of the offence through legally admissible evidence.
Section 267 provides the procedural mechanism through which this evidence is brought before the Court.
Therefore:
Complaint filed ≠ Guilt established
Evidence produced and proved according to law → Court evaluates the case
Importance of Cross-Examination
Cross-examination is particularly important in cases instituted otherwise than on a police report because the complainant may rely heavily on witness testimony to establish the allegations.
Through cross-examination, the accused can test:
- the witness’s credibility;
- the accuracy of their recollection;
- inconsistencies in their testimony;
- contradictions with other evidence;
- possible bias; and
- whether the witness actually had an opportunity to observe the alleged event.
Evidence Must Be Legally Admissible
The prosecution cannot rely on every piece of information merely because it supports the complaint.
Evidence must satisfy the requirements of applicable law relating to:
- relevance;
- admissibility;
- proof;
- authenticity; and
- procedure.
The Magistrate determines what evidence can properly be considered.
Section 267 and Burden of Proof
The prosecution or complainant seeking conviction must establish the ingredients of the offence according to law.
The accused is not convicted merely because a complaint has been filed or because allegations have been made.
The evidence must be considered by the Court before determining criminal liability.
Section 267 and Defence Rights
Although Section 267 focuses on prosecution evidence, it also protects the accused indirectly by ensuring that the prosecution evidence is subject to the ordinary safeguards of a fair trial.
The accused gets an opportunity to:
- hear the evidence;
- cross-examine witnesses;
- challenge documents and other evidence;
- expose contradictions; and
- present a defence at the appropriate subsequent stage.
Section 267 and Section 268
Section 267 deals with evidence for the prosecution in a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report.
The subsequent provisions deal with the next stages of the case, including consideration of the evidence and the position of the accused.
Therefore:
Section 267 → Prosecution evidence
Subsequent provisions → Further consideration and trial
Difference Between Section 265 and Section 267 — Easy Revision
Section 265
Warrant-case + Police report
Section 267
Warrant-case + No police report
Remember:
265 = Police Report
267 = Otherwise than Police Report
This is a useful shortcut for examinations.
Practical Importance
Section 267 ensures that even in cases not based on a police report, the prosecution must establish its case through a proper judicial process.
It prevents conviction based merely on allegations and provides the accused with the opportunity to challenge the evidence.
The provision therefore contributes to:
- fair trial;
- proper recording of evidence;
- examination of witnesses;
- cross-examination;
- judicial evaluation of evidence; and
- protection of the accused’s procedural rights.
Common Confusions
Does Section 267 apply to every criminal complaint?
No.
It applies to the relevant warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report.
Is Section 267 the same as Section 265?
No.
Both deal with prosecution evidence, but they apply to different categories of warrant-cases.
Who presents the evidence?
The prosecution or complainant, as applicable, presents evidence supporting the charge.
Can the accused cross-examine prosecution witnesses?
Yes.
The accused is given the opportunity to challenge prosecution evidence through cross-examination.
Does filing a complaint prove guilt?
No.
The prosecution must establish the offence through legally admissible evidence.
Is defence evidence dealt with in Section 267?
No. Section 267 deals specifically with evidence for the prosecution. The defence evidence stage is dealt with separately.
Topic at a Glance
- BNSS Section: 267
- Subject: Evidence for prosecution
- Type of case: Warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report
- Court: Magistrate
- Main party presenting evidence: Prosecution/complainant
- Evidence: Oral, documentary and other legally admissible evidence
- Accused’s right: Opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses
- Purpose: To establish and test the prosecution case
- Key distinction: Section 265 applies to cases instituted on a police report
- Section 267: Applies to cases instituted otherwise than on a police report
- Corresponding CrPC provision: Section 244
Quick Revision
- Section 267 deals with evidence for the prosecution.
- It applies to a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report.
- The prosecution or complainant presents evidence before the Magistrate.
- Evidence may include witnesses, documents and other legally admissible material.
- Prosecution witnesses may be subjected to cross-examination by the accused.
- The Court records and evaluates the evidence according to law.
- The filing of a complaint does not by itself establish guilt.
- The prosecution must establish the ingredients of the alleged offence through evidence.
- Section 265 = warrant-case instituted on police report.
- Section 267 = warrant-case instituted otherwise than on police report.
- Section 267 BNSS broadly corresponds to Section 244 CrPC.
One-Line Exam Answer
Section 267 BNSS deals with evidence for the prosecution in a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report, allowing the prosecution or complainant to produce evidence before the Magistrate while giving the accused an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses.
ALSO READ: Section 266 – Evidence for defence
Conclusion
Section 267 of the BNSS governs the prosecution evidence stage in warrant-cases instituted otherwise than on a police report. It enables the prosecution or complainant to present witnesses, documents and other legally admissible evidence before the Magistrate. The accused is given an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and challenge the prosecution case. The provision therefore ensures that allegations in a complaint are tested through a proper judicial process before the Court determines the criminal liability of the accused.
