Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Analysis and conclusion:
Procedure and Evidence in Search & Seizure - Judicial Observations and Deviations ["The State of Tripura vs Sri Prasenjit Nath - Tripura"]
Analysis and conclusion:
Night Searches & Warrantless Operations - Legal Requirements and Procedural Flaws ["Pappulal S/o Devilal Jat, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Fatehpura vs Union Of India, Through Cbn - Rajasthan"], ["Nand Kishore, S/o Shri Meghraj vs Union Of India, CBN - Rajasthan"]
Analysis and conclusion:
Videography & Documentation Compliance - Impact on Evidence Validity ["KRISHNA PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["Vinay Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"], ["Suresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268"]
Analysis and conclusion:
Legal Principles & Violations - Recording of Satisfaction & Procedural Compliance ["SHRI SHYAM SUNDAR K vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka"], ["ITC Limited VS State Of Karnataka - Supreme Court"], ["Asst Collector Of Central Excise VS Wilfred Sebastian - Kerala"]
Analysis and conclusion:
Summary
References:- ["Pravendra Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["The State of Tripura vs Sri Prasenjit Nath - Tripura"]- ["Pappulal S/o Devilal Jat, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Fatehpura vs Union Of India, Through Cbn - Rajasthan"]- ["Moksedul Hoque, S/o. Late Hamidur Rahman vs State Of Assam, Rep. By The PP, Assam - Gauhati"]- ["MOKSEDUL HOQUE vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR - Gauhati"]- ["Sanjeev Dev Verma vs The State of Bihar - Patna"]- ["SHRI SHYAM SUNDAR K vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka"]- ["Suresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268"]- ["Balwant Singh v. R. D. Shah Director of Inspection Income-tax - Delhi"]- ["SARAVANAN S vs State Rep by The Inspector of Police - Madras"]- ["Gopi Sah VS State of Bihar - Patna"]- ["Saurabh Kumar vs The State of Bihar - Patna"]- ["Nand Kishore, S/o Shri Meghraj vs Union Of India, CBN - Rajasthan"]- ["PRAVIN VISHAMBHAR CHAUDHARY @ CHUNNI vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay"]
In today's digital age, transparency in law enforcement is more critical than ever. Searches and seizures by police can profoundly impact individuals' rights, making procedural safeguards essential. A common query arises: 105 BNSS RECORDING OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE. This provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)—which replaced the CrPC—mandates audiovisual recording to ensure accountability. This blog explores the legal mandate, rationale, implications, and best practices, drawing from statutory text and judicial insights.
Note: This is general information based on legal provisions and cases. It is not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Section 105 of the BNSS explicitly requires that the entire process of conducting a search or seizure, including the preparation of the seizure list and signing of witnesses, shall be recorded through any audio-video electronic means preferably mobile phoneSuresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268. This makes audiovisual (AV) recording a non-negotiable step, shifting from optional to mandatory documentation.
Key elements include:- Preferred Method: Mobile phones or other audio-video electronic devices for ease and accessibility.- Scope: Covers the full process—from entry to seizure list preparation and witness signatures.- Forwarding Obligation: The recording must be sent without delay to the District Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate, or Judicial Magistrate of the first class Suresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268.
This provision promotes transparency, prevents tampering, and protects both citizens and officers from false claims.
The rationale behind Section 105 BNSS is rooted in upholding Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees life and personal liberty through fair procedures. The provision creates a mandatory duty for police to audiovisually record the entire process of conducting a search of any place or person and of seizing any property or evidence thereinSuresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268.
Benefits include:- Transparency and Accountability: Visual proof deters misconduct like evidence planting.- Evidence Preservation: Recordings serve as contemporaneous evidence in court.- Protection for Officers: Shields against fabricated allegations of abuse.
Judicial precedents reinforce this. Recording reasons and maintaining transparency are essential to uphold individual rights during searches and seizuresAJIT KUMAR AGARWALLA VS UNION OF INDIA - 1998 0 Supreme(Cal) 74DURGA PRASAD VS H. R. Gomes,superintendent (Prevention) central Excise,nagpur - 1965 0 Supreme(SC) 346.
Failure at any step can render the search and seizure illegal, potentially excluding evidence DURGA PRASAD VS H. R. Gomes,superintendent (Prevention) central Excise,nagpur - 1965 0 Supreme(SC) 346.
Courts take non-compliance seriously. Non-compliance can lead to the quashing of proceedings or exclusion of evidence, as AV recording is a substantive requirement Suresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268.
Related cases highlight risks:- In a hooch tragedy prosecution under Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, seizure lists prepared by informant in themselves cannot be treated to be proof of their contents. Witnesses were unreliable, no independent witnesses examined, leading to acquittal due to procedural lapses like delayed FIR and missing FSL reports supplied under CrPC Section 207 State of Bihar VS Chhathu Pasi - 2022 Supreme(Pat) 788.- NDPS Act cases stress proper search: Investigation includes even search and seizure, with empowered officers required to follow protocols. Delays in sampling or weight discrepancies are trial issues but underscore procedural rigor Ramchandra S/o Shri Heera Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 196Ramchandra S/o Shri Heera Ram VS State of Rajasthan, Through PP - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 204Mukesh Singh VS State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi) - 2020 8 Supreme 19.- Arms Act conviction overturned: Prosecution failed to prove the seizure of the firearm from the accused, as witnesses couldn't identify, and key officers weren't examined Islamul Haque @ Aslam VS State of West Bengal.
These illustrate how procedural flaws, absent AV proof, invite acquittals and prejudice fair trials under Article 21.
BNSS does not outline explicit exceptions, positioning recording as the default. Practical issues like technical failures may arise, but deviations require justification. Officers should document any issues contemporaneously.
In NDPS contexts, petitioner cannot be extended benefit of bail on the ground that reduction in weight of the contraband seized was noticed at the time of certification by the Magistrate under Section 52A, showing courts scrutinize but defer tampering claims to trial—AV recordings could preempt such disputes Ramchandra S/o Shri Heera Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 196.
Courts emphasize right to fair investigation and trial under Article 21. Testimony of police personnel will be treated in the same manner as testimony of any other witness and there is no principle of law that without corroboration by independent witnesses his testimony cannot be relied uponMukesh Singh VS State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi) - 2020 8 Supreme 19. However, AV mandates reduce reliance on oral testimony.
Trial Judges cannot resort to heuristics... They have duty to protect rights of accusedState of Bihar VS Chhathu Pasi - 2022 Supreme(Pat) 788, reinforcing procedural adherence.
Any failure to record or forward recordings should be considered a procedural lapse that may invalidate the search or seizureSuresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268.
In conclusion, Section 105 of the BNSS mandates that all searches and seizures be audiovisually recorded using electronic means, preferably mobile phones, and that these recordings be forwarded to a Magistrate without delay. This is crucial for justice. Stay informed—transparency protects all.
References:1. Suresh, S/o. Bhaskaran vs State Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2268: Statutory mandate under Section 105 BNSS.2. AJIT KUMAR AGARWALLA VS UNION OF INDIA - 1998 0 Supreme(Cal) 74: Recording reasons in searches.3. DURGA PRASAD VS H. R. Gomes,superintendent (Prevention) central Excise,nagpur - 1965 0 Supreme(SC) 346: Validity of compliant searches.4. State of Bihar VS Chhathu Pasi - 2022 Supreme(Pat) 788: Procedural lapses in seizure proof.5. Ramchandra S/o Shri Heera Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 196, Ramchandra S/o Shri Heera Ram VS State of Rajasthan, Through PP - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 204, Mukesh Singh VS State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi) - 2020 8 Supreme 19: NDPS search protocols.6. Islamul Haque @ Aslam VS State of West Bengal: Seizure identification failures.
#BNSS105, #SearchSeizure, #PoliceRecording
Section 105 BNSS is being quoted as under: 105. Recording of search and seizure through audio- video electronic means. ... Therefore, this Court directs the Director General of Police, U.P., Lucknow to issue detailed SOP as required by Rules 18(5) of the Uttar Pradesh Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Rules, 2024 for mandatorily conducting audio video recording of search, seizure or possession of property or other incriminating ... Section....
Although in the FIR and also in his examination-in-chief he stated that he prepared pre-search memo and also seized the offending article but during cross-examination, he stated that pre-search memo and seizure list were prepared by SI Ratan Rabi Das. ... 3Exbt.3 (as a whole)The pre-search memo and signature of PW5 on the same.4Exbt.2 (as a whole)Seizure list and signature of PW5 on the same. ... Exhibit NumberDescription1Exbt.1/1, 2/2 and 3/1Signature of PW-2 on sample drawn memo, seizure#HL_....
In order to sanctify the search and seizure of contraband, it was expected from the Seizure Officer to prepare the memos at the crime place that too in the presence of the independent witnesses if available nearby the place. ... He submits that the sanctity of the seizure made in the premises of Police Station is highly doubtful and no explanation furnished by the team members as to why the search and seizure was not made at the place where the vehicle was intercepted. ... Taking of th....
BNSS , 2023 against the impugned judgment and order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, (Addl.)
Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorisation. ... Referring to the aforesaid provision, it is submitted that the first part thereof pertains to recording the information in writing and the second part concerns recording of grounds of belief necessitating the search operation between sunset and before sunrise. ... In fact, even in the GDE, recording the secret information, no such ground requiring search and seizure op....
But in special circumstances involving emergent situations, the recording of the information in writing and sending a copy thereof to the official superior may get postponed by a reasonable period, that is, after the search, entry and seizure. The question is one of urgency and expediency. ... PW-8, Sakesh Kumar, the constable from STF Patna has reiterated what PW-7 had stated as far as the search and seizure was concerned. ... The learned Trial Court has observed that search and #HL_S....
We are, therefore, of opinion that the power of search granted under S.105 of the Customs Act is a power of general search. ... Search and seizure is a serious invasion on the rights of the subjects. The search and seizure was really not known at earlier stages to common law. ... The search and seizure is confined to relevant or useful books of account. ... In other words, it is contended that the power of search u....
Additional emphasis is placed on the failure to comply with Sections 105 and 85 of the BNSS, which mandate videography of the crime scene, a safeguard introduced to ensure transparency and prevent arbitrariness in seizure operations. ... The contention regarding non-compliance of Sections 105 and 85 of the BNSS, particularly the absence of mandatory videography of the crime scene, also assumes significance. ... The defence has drawn pointed attention to alleged deviations in the procedure adopted during....
Section 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 clearly prescribes that the audio-video recording of the seizure & search and it is also mandatory that the video recording of seizure is sent to the Judicial Magistrate, but the police does not take any ... video recording of the seizure. ... From perusal of the FIR, it transpires that after conducting a search, a search panchnama was prepared in the presenc....
It is a well-settled principle of law that recording of satisfaction by the head of the raid party is a sine qua non for conducting a warrantless search. In the absence of such recorded satisfaction, the entire raid and consequential search and seizure are vitiated. ... In the present case, the respondent has conducted investigation and effected search and seizure without registering the FIR or recording reasons in writing in the Station House Diary in case of urgency....
On inquiry, no body offered any satisfactory explanation. Accordingly, in presence of witnesses to the seizure, a search and seizure list was prepared.
“10.4 Investigation includes even search and seizure. As the investigation is to be carried out by the officer in charge of a police station and none other and therefore purposely Section 53 authorises the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, invest any officer of the department of drugs control, revenue or excise or any other department or any class of such officers with the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of offences under the NDPS Act. State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi), (2020) 10 SCC 120: Section 42 confe....
State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi)-(2020) 10 SCC 120: As the investigation is to be carried out by the officer in charge of a police station and none other and therefore purposely Section 53 authorises the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, invest any officer of the department of drugs control, revenue or excise or any other department or any class of such officers with the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of offences under the NDPS Act. "10.4 Investigation includes even search and seizure. Section 42 confer....
9.4 Investigation includes even search and seizure. As the investigation is to be carried out by the officer in charge of a police station and none other and therefore purposely Section 53 authorises the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, invest any officer of the department of drugs control, revenue or excise or any other department or any class of such officers with the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of offences under the NDPS Act. It appears that the legislature in its wisdom has never thought that th....
The seizure list was prepared in respect of search and seizure. He proved his signature and that of the officer-in-charge on the seizure list. He proved this seizure list which was marked as exhibit-1.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
