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…!
Courts have also directed the police and investigation agencies to facilitate video conferencing for witnesses or accused who cannot appear physically, ensuring justice is not delayed or prejudiced due to logistical issues ["Mrs. Evnice L Chawngthu vs The I ACMM - Telangana"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
In the digital age, the Indian judiciary has increasingly embraced technology, especially post-pandemic. A common query from legal practitioners and litigants is: sec 183 bnss canbe done though video conference? This question touches on whether statements or examinations under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 – the successor to the CrPC – can be recorded or conducted virtually.
While Section 183 BNSS itself, which deals with recording statements by police or magistrates (similar to CrPC provisions), does not explicitly mention video conferencing, judicial precedents, Supreme Court directions, and High Court rules affirm its permissibility. This blog post breaks down the legal framework, key guidelines, and practical examples. Note: This is general information based on available judicial materials and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
Section 183 BNSS empowers authorities to record statements from witnesses or victims, often in sensitive cases like those under POCSO or other crimes. For instance, in a case involving a child victim, the statement of victim girl recorded under Section 183 of BNSS Act, 2023 was referenced to establish facts SRI NAGENDRA K S vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36541. Similarly, eyewitness statements under this section have been pivotal in investigations GOUTAM CHAKRABORTY vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 6631.
The provision emphasizes accurate documentation, but it remains silent on the mode – physical or virtual. This gap is bridged by broader judicial policies on technology adoption.
Section 183 BNSS does not prohibit video conferencing, and courts have filled this void through guidelines. The Supreme Court has issued comprehensive directions for video and hybrid hearings, stating that proceedings conducted via video conference shall be treated as judicial proceedings with all applicable courtesies and protocols Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049. These include infrastructure setup, training, and SOPs for witness examinations.
High Courts echo this. The Madras High Court Rules explicitly permit proceedings may be conducted through Video-Conferencing, including fixing schedules, appointing coordinators, enabling public participation, and ensuring authentication of deposition and documents Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3233. This covers evidence recording, making virtual modes valid subject to protocols.
The Supreme Court's guidelines in Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049 mandate High Courts to facilitate video conferencing for all stages, including examination of witnesses. In a notable order, witnesses, including overseas ones, appeared via video conference, with the Court holding such evidence valid in criminal trials Kulvir Ram @ Mati VS State of Punjab - 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 1240.
Practically, matters are routinely heard via video: The matter was heard through 'Video Conference' Nallathambi VS State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Thiruvallur - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 1339, and counsel appeared physically/through video conference Frenzy Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. VS. Even in habeas corpus or bail matters, hearings proceed virtually: This matter is taken up through Video Conference today Ravi VS State - 2020 Supreme(Kar) 667; The matter was heard through 'Video Conference' Sumathi VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Chennai - 2020 Supreme(Mad) 681.
Video conferencing aligns with BNSS procedures. In POCSO cases, victim statements under Section 183 BNSS have been recorded and relied upon, often in contexts where virtual modes aid accessibility SRI NAGENDRA K S vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36541. Courts recognize electronic means for evidence, provided identity verification, recording, and authentication protocols are followed Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3233.
For overseas or distant witnesses, it's particularly useful: the Supreme Court has also recognized the utility of video conferencing for recording evidence, including overseas witnesses Kulvir Ram @ Mati VS State of Punjab - 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 1240. No statutory bar exists under Section 183 or related Evidence Act provisions State Of West Bengal VS Moumita Saha - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1569.
To ensure credibility:- Identity Verification: Mandatory checks before starting.- Recording: Full sessions recorded with timestamps.- Security: Secure platforms to prevent tampering.- Public Access: Where feasible, hybrid modes allow observation Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3233.
These SOPs make virtual Section 183 BNSS proceedings as binding as physical ones Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049.
Real-world applications abound:- In a sexual assault case, the victim's Section 183 BNSS statement indicated key facts, underscoring its role even amid virtual hearings SRI NAGENDRA K S vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36541.- NCLT proceedings under related sections featured appearances through video conference Frenzy Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. VS.- Criminal petitions, like those for bail or vehicle release, were heard virtually, modifying conditions post-hearing Ravi VS State - 2020 Supreme(Kar) 667.- Writ petitions on illegal restraints or detentions proceeded via video, directing actions like considering representations B. Venkatesh VS District Revenue Officer/Nodal Officer (Cable), Trichy District - 2020 Supreme(Mad) 1556Shaikh Niyaz Anwarbhai VS State Of Gujarat - 2020 Supreme(Guj) 707.
In a Kerala case on phone tapping, BNSS applicability was discussed in virtual contexts, emphasizing procedural adherence MURUGESH NARENDRAN vs UNION OF INDIA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 38702. Bail under BNSS Section 187(3) was granted after virtual arguments, prioritizing liberty MOHAMMED SAJJID vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20982.
These illustrate that courts conduct Section 183-related matters virtually without issue, especially for practicality.
While permissible, limitations apply:- Technological Feasibility: Not all courts have infrastructure.- Case Sensitivity: Complex evidence may require physical presence.- Statutory Compliance: Must follow Evidence Act presumptions on custody, though virtual modes are authenticated Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3233.
Courts exercise discretion; no blanket prohibition exists Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049.
Section 183 BNSS proceedings can generally be conducted via video conference, backed by Supreme Court directions Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1049, Madras High Court rules Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3233, and widespread practice Kulvir Ram @ Mati VS State of Punjab - 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 1240. This modern approach enhances access to justice while upholding integrity.
Key Takeaways:- No explicit prohibition; judicial guidelines endorse VC.- Protocols ensure authenticity equivalent to physical modes.- Useful for victims, overseas witnesses, and efficiency.- Always adhere to SOPs for admissibility.
Stay updated on evolving e-courts rules. For tailored advice, reach out to a legal expert.
References:1. Supreme Court Directions Sarvesh Mathur VS Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 10492. Madras High Court Rules Aishwarya Sridhar Rep. by her mother as her power of attorney holder S. Bhuvaneswari VS Harihara Venkataraman Balasubramanian Rep. by his father as his Power of Attorney Holder N. Balasubramanian - 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 32333. Witness VC Orders Kulvir Ram @ Mati VS State of Punjab - 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 12404. Other cases: SRI NAGENDRA K S vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36541, Frenzy Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. VS, Nallathambi VS State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Thiruvallur - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 1339, etc.
#BNSS #VideoConferenceCourt #LegalTechIndia
Aggrieved by permission to record the statement through ordinary video conference, i.e., WhatsApp or other electronic channels, and not through an embassy, the petitioner had now come up before this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 9. ... Given the above, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, it was fully justified for the trial Court concerned to have permitted the recording of the statements of the witnesses through ordinary video conference/WhatsApp video call. ... confere....
On 14.03.2025, the counsel for the petitioner has filed application under Section 478 of BNSS along with application under Section 490 of BNSS and another application praying to appear through video conference. ... The said application praying to appear through video conference came to be rejected by order dated 14.03.2025 and NBW has been issued against the petitioner/accused No.2 stating that he has violated the conditions imposed in order dated 07.03.2025. ... The accused No.2 shall....
Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State would contend that, the victim girl is a child under POCSO Act and sexual assault has been done on her as per her statement recorded by the police and also under Section 183 of BNSS. ... The statement of victim girl recorded under Section 183 of BNSS Act, 2023, and also recorded by the police indicate that there was love affair between petitioner and the victim girl. The victim is of the age of understanding the conseq....
UNDER SECTION SEC. 230-232 - SECOND MOTION Counsel / Authorised Representative appeared physically/through video conference: For petitioners : Mr. ... (CAA) No.183/KB/2021” it should be read as “C.P.(CAA) No.183/KB/2017”. ... (CAA)/183(KB)2017 COMP.APPL/42(KB)2022 CORAM: 1. HON’BLE MEMBER(J), SHRI ROHIT KAPOOR 2.
The petitioner produced the audio and video visuals of the press conference conducted by the 13th respondent on 01.09.2024 as Ext.P3. The petitioner also relied on the report published in the Malayala Manorama daily on 02.09.2024, which is produced as Ext.P4. ... The provisions of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) are applicable not only to the citizens of this country, but also to an MLA. ... In the press conference, the 13th respondent admitted the illegal phone tapping of various persons, inc....
/Section 183 of the BNSS. ... /Section 183 of BNSS that there is another aspect of the matter where an individual has been an eyewitness to the incident so far as the manner in which the victim's life was forcedly taken away. ... The other individuals who intended to give their statements as well as the video recordings were not well responded by the investigating agency. Petitioner as such has prayed for transfer of investigation from the local police authorities to a specialised agency. ... aspects o....
The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.183 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 88, 318(2), 318(4) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS, 2023’), Section 15(3) of Indian Medical Counsel Act, Sec.22 r/w 23 of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal ... Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the petitioners are determined to see the process through and the alleged offences are punishable with an imprisonment up to seven years, the Police concerned have not issue....
The contention of the Public Prosecutor is that a different meaning is given in Sec. 187(3) of the BNSS in place of Sec.167(2)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. cannot be accepted. The dictum laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Kumar Paul's case (supra) is equally applicable to Sec. 187(3) of the BNSS also. ... Simply because the petitioner has antecedents or he is an habitual offender, an application for statutory bail under Sec. 187(3) of the BNSS cannot be rejected. Therefore, I am ....
UNDER SECTION SEC. 230-232 - SECOND MOTION Counsel / Authorized Representative appeared through video conference: From the office of RD(ER), Kolkata 1. Mr. ... (CAA)/183(KB)2021 IN C.A.(CAA)/479(KB)2020 CORAM: 1. HON’BLE MEMBER(J), SHRI RAJASEKHAR V.K. 2.
The contention of the Public Prosecutor is that a different meaning is given in Sec. 187(3) of the BNSS in place of Sec.167(2)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. cannot be accepted. ... The counsel submitted that, the application was filed under Sec. 187(3) of the BNSS before the sessions judge. Even then, the learned Sessions Judge did not consider the same. When an application is filed under Sec. 187(3) of the Rakesh Kumar Paul's case (supra) is equally applicable to Sec. 187(3) o....
1. The matter was heard through “Video Conference”.
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to take action against the 3rd and 5th respondents for illegally restraining the petitioner from doing his Cable business and also restrained them from disturbing the petitioner's Cable business, based on the petitioner's representation dated 14.10.2020.) (This writ petition is heard through video conference)
Shah for the respondent – State through video conference. 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Abid Qureshi appearing on behalf of learned advocate Mr. M.R. Qureshi for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Vrunda C.
1. The matter was heard through "Video Conference".
This matter is taken up through Video Conference today.
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
