Trial-In-Absentia And The Right To Fair Trial – A Necessary Reform Or A Risk To Justice?
- IJLLR Journal
- Aug 4
- 2 min read
Aditi Singh, OP Jindal Global University
ABSTRACT
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, establishes trial-in- absentia under Sections 355 and 356, permitting comprehensive trials, convictions, and punishment without the presence of the accused. This represents a notable departure from the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, which solely allowed for the recording of evidence in the absence of the accused. It seeks to minimize delays and prevent intentional evasion of justice; yet, it raises significant concerns over due process violations, false convictions, and the unequal impact on regular persons in comparison to influential fugitives.
This paper analyzes the legal framework of trial-in-absentia under BNSS, assessing its procedural safeguards including the 90-day waiting period, proclamation process, and limited ability to appeal and interrogates whether these protections adequately prevent unjust convictions. It also compares BNSS with global legal standards to identify best practices India currently lacks, such as automatic retrial rights and stricter judicial oversight before declaring an accused an absconder.
This research also examines the economic and social disparities in the application of trial-in-absentia. Although BNSS might theoretically be applied to fugitive businessmen such as Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, and Mehul Choksi, the implementation is frequently hindered by international extradition rules and human rights considerations. Simultaneously,ordinary defendants particularly those from underprivileged groups encounter significant legal repercussions to contest inaccurate proclamation as absconders. This paper contends that BNSS may establish a dual justice system, wherein the affluent escape accountability while the impoverished endure the full consequences of in-absentia convictions.
This paper suggests essential legal reforms to guarantee that trial-in-absentia does not infringe upon fundamental rights, including automatic retrial provisions, enhanced judicial oversight, equitable appeal processes, and uniform legal treatment for white-collar offenders and regular defendants. This study evaluates whether the BNSS trial-in-absentia represents progress in criminal justice reform or establishes a risky precedent that compromises fairness and due process through the integration of legal research, case studies, and international comparisons.
