If your case involves charges under Sections 69 and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the accused has been absconding, with the chargesheet already submitted despite this, understanding how the legal process unfolds in this specific combination of circumstances is important, whether you're the accused in this situation or a party following the case's progress.

Section 69 of the BNS, discussed in an earlier response, criminalises sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage without any intention of fulfilling it, carrying punishment up to ten years imprisonment along with a fine. Section 64 deals with rape, corresponding to the erstwhile Section 376 IPC, carrying punishment of rigorous imprisonment for a minimum term of ten years, extending to life imprisonment, along with a fine, with Section 64(2) prescribing enhanced minimum punishment of not less than twenty years, extending to life, for specific aggravated categories of rape. This is an extremely serious combination of charges given the severity of punishment involved.

Under Section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 173 CrPC), the police are legally permitted to file a chargesheet even against an absconding accused, since the investigating officer's obligation is to complete the investigation and place before the court whatever evidence has been collected, and the accused's absence or absconding status doesn't prevent this administrative and investigative process from being completed, particularly since delaying chargesheet filing indefinitely simply because the accused cannot be located could unfairly prejudice the victim's right to see the case progress and could also affect the availability and reliability of evidence and witness testimony over time if the matter is left in limbo.

Once the chargesheet is filed naming an absconding accused, the Magistrate examines this chargesheet and, given that Sections 69 and 64 are offences exclusively triable by the Court of Session, would proceed to commit the case to the Sessions Court following the committal process discussed in earlier responses, even though the accused remains absent, since committal itself is largely an administrative and procedural step that doesn't require the accused's presence.

If the accused continues to remain absconding despite the chargesheet being filed and the case being committed, the court would have already likely initiated, or would now initiate, the escalating process discussed in detail in an earlier response regarding absconding accused, beginning with issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant under Section 72 BNSS (Section 70 CrPC) if this hasn't already happened, and if the warrant cannot be executed, proceeding to formal proclamation proceedings under Section 84 BNSS (Section 82 CrPC), requiring the accused to appear within a specified period, typically not less than thirty days, and if this proclamation also goes unheeded, the accused can be declared a proclaimed offender, carrying separate criminal liability under Section 209 of the BNS (Section 174A IPC), with punishment extending up to seven years specifically because the underlying offence here (rape under Section 64) is punishable with imprisonment for life or ten years or more, triggering the enhanced punishment bracket for evading proclamation in connection with such serious offences.

Given the extreme seriousness of the underlying charges, courts are likely to also pursue attachment of the accused's property under Section 85 BNSS (Section 83 CrPC) relatively assertively in a case of this seriousness, as a further coercive measure to compel appearance, recognising that allowing a person accused of such grave offences to simply evade the legal process indefinitely is a serious concern both for the victim's access to justice and for broader public confidence in the legal system's ability to hold serious offenders accountable.

It's worth understanding that the trial itself generally cannot meaningfully proceed to a conclusive judgment while the accused remains absconding, since the fundamental principles of a fair trial require the accused's presence for being charged, examined, and given the opportunity to defend themselves, though as discussed in an earlier response, Section 356 of the BNSS (Section 299 CrPC) does allow for evidence to be recorded in the absence of a proclaimed offender in specific circumstances, preserving witness testimony that could otherwise be lost or degraded over time, so that this evidence remains available and usable once the accused is eventually apprehended or surrenders.

If you're the accused in this situation, it's important to understand with complete clarity that continued absconding in a case of this seriousness carries extremely serious escalating consequences, including the additional and independent criminal liability of being a proclaimed offender, potential loss of your property through attachment, and a significantly more difficult path to eventually securing bail even if you do surrender, since courts examining bail applications for someone who has been declared a proclaimed offender in a serious case like this will view your prior evasion as a significant and directly relevant factor weighing heavily against release, given that it speaks directly to the flight risk consideration central to any bail decision.

Given the extreme seriousness of Sections 69 and 64 BNS charges, if you are the accused or are advising someone in this position, the far more prudent course, despite the genuine difficulty and fear involved in facing such serious allegations, is to arrange a proper and coordinated surrender through experienced legal counsel, who can help manage this process to minimise unnecessary prejudice, ensure your side of the case is properly presented from the earliest possible point, and begin building whatever defence the specific facts support, rather than allowing the situation to continue escalating through continued evasion, which fundamentally only worsens your legal position over time without providing any genuine long-term benefit.

If you're the complainant or victim's family in this case, understanding that the legal process continues to move forward through the escalating mechanisms discussed above, and that your specific interests, including ensuring the investigation and eventual trial proceed properly despite the accused's absence, can be actively supported through engaged legal counsel monitoring the case and, where appropriate, specifically requesting the court to pursue these escalating measures more assertively given the seriousness of the charges involved.

Given the extreme gravity of this situation and how much depends on the specific circumstances of the case, whether you're the accused facing this extremely difficult decision about surrender, or the complainant seeking to ensure the case progresses properly despite the accused's absence, it's essential to have experienced legal guidance without any further delay. You can reach out to the team at Aapka Legal Advice to have this situation assessed urgently, given its seriousness. If your matter requires an experienced advocate to arrange a coordinated surrender and defence, or to actively pursue the case against an absconding accused in a matter of this gravity, this list of Top Criminal Lawyers in India | Aapka Legal Advice can help you find suitable representation for a case of this seriousness.

Conclusion: Where charges under BNS Sections 69 and 64 involve an absconding accused with the chargesheet already filed, the case proceeds through committal to the Sessions Court despite the accused's absence, while the escalating framework of Non-Bailable Warrant, proclamation, and potential declaration as a proclaimed offender continues to apply with particular force given the extreme seriousness of these offences, so if you're the accused, arranging a properly coordinated surrender through experienced counsel represents a far more strategically sound path forward than continued evasion, which only compounds the legal jeopardy you face over time.