Law and You >Procedural Laws > BNSS > Cognizance of Offences (Ss. 210 to 214 BNSS)
List of Sub-Topics:
- Introduction
- Cognizance of Offences by Magistrate (S. 210)
- Authority of Magistrates to Take Cognizance of Offences (S. 210(1))
- Power of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (S. 210(2))
- Transfer on Application of Accused (S. 211)
- Making Over of Cases to Magistrates (S. 212)
- Power of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (S. 212(1))
- Power of an empowered Magistrate of the First Class (S. 212(2))
- Cognizance of Offences by Court of Session (S. 213)
- Additional Sessions Judges to Try Cases Made Over to Them (S. 214)
- Conclusion
- Related Topics
The concept of cognizance of offences by a Magistrate marks an important stage in the initiation of criminal proceedings. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) specifies the circumstances in which a Magistrate may take cognizance of an offence. The provision empowers a Magistrate to take cognizance upon receiving a complaint, a police report, or information from any person other than a police officer, or upon the Magistrate’s own knowledge.
The provision plays a significant role in ensuring that criminal proceedings can be set in motion through different legally recognised sources of information. It also establishes the authority and jurisdiction of Magistrates at the initial stage of criminal adjudication. A proper understanding of provisions is therefore essential to distinguish taking cognizance from subsequent stages such as inquiry, issuance of process, and trial. This article examines the meaning, scope, modes, and legal significance of cognizance under BNSS.
Cognizance of Offences by Magistrate (S. 210 BNSS):
Authority of Magistrates to Take Cognizance of Offences (S. 210(1) BNSS):
According to Section 210(1) BNSS, subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any Magistrate of the first class, and any Magistrate of the second class specially empowered in this behalf under sub-section (2), may take cognizance of any offence—
(a) upon receiving a complaint of facts, including any complaint filed by a person authorised under any special law, which constitutes such offence;
(b) upon a police report (submitted in any mode including electronic mode) of such facts;
(c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed.
This provision is about taking cognizance of an offence by a Magistrate. Any Magistrate of the first class; and a Magistrate of the second class who has been specially empowered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate under sub-section (2). “Taking Cognizance” means the Magistrate applies his judicial mind to the facts of an alleged offence for the purpose of proceeding under the criminal law. It is not the same as taking the accused into custody or finding him guilty. There are three modes under clauses (a), (b), and (c).
- Clause (a) on Complaint to Magistrate: The Magistrate can take cognizance when he receives a complaint containing facts that constitute an offence. For example, ‘A’ tells the Magistrate that ‘B’ assaulted him and provides facts showing that an offence of voluntarily causing hurt was committed. The Magistrate may take cognizance based on A’s complaint, subject to the applicable procedure. The provision specifically says that the complaint can also be filed by a person authorised under a special law. For example, if a particular statute authorises a government officer or another specified person to file a complaint for an offence under that special statute, such a complaint can also form the basis for cognizance.
- Clause (b) on a Police Report: The Magistrate can take cognizance when the police submit a report containing facts constituting an offence. The provision expressly clarifies that the police report may be submitted electronically as well. For example, after investigating an alleged theft, the police submit their report to the Magistrate stating facts which disclose the commission of an offence. The Magistrate may take cognizance on that police report.
- Clause (c) on Information from Another Person or on His Own Knowledge: There are two ways to obtain knowledge. First way is that information from someone other than a police officer. For example, suppose ‘C’ informs the Magistrate that ‘D’ has committed an offence. If the information discloses an offence, the Magistrate may take cognizance on that information, subject to the applicable procedure. The person providing the information does not have to be a police officer. Second way is that, Magistrate’s own knowledge. A Magistrate may also take cognizance based on his own knowledge that an offence has been committed. For example, if an offence is committed in the presence or direct knowledge of the Magistrate, the Magistrate may act on that knowledge, subject to the procedural safeguards provided by law.
Power of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (S. 210(2) BNSS):
According to Section 210(2) BNSS, the Chief Judicial Magistrate may empower any Magistrate of the second class to take cognizance under sub-section (1) of such offences as are within his competence to inquire into or try.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) can specifically empower a second-class Magistrate to take cognizance, but there is an important limitation. The second-class Magistrate can be empowered only in respect of offences which are within his competence to inquire into or try.
So the CJM cannot simply give a second-class Magistrate unlimited power.
Transfer on Application of Accused (S. 211 BNSS):
When a Magistrate takes cognizance of an offence under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 210, the accused shall, before any evidence is taken, be informed that he is entitled to have the case inquired into or tried by another Magistrate, and if the accused or any of the accused, if there be more than one, objects to further proceedings before the Magistrate taking cognizance, the case shall be transferred to such other Magistrate as may be specified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in this behalf.
This provision deals with an important safeguard available to an accused when the Magistrate takes cognizance of an offence on the basis of his own knowledge or information received from a person other than a police officer.
The provision says that when a Magistrate takes cognizance under Section 210(1)(c) on information received from someone other than a police officer; or on the Magistrate’s own knowledge, the accused must be informed before any evidence is recorded that he has a right to have the case heard by another Magistrate. If the accused objects to the case continuing before the Magistrate who initially took cognizance, the case must be transferred to another Magistrate designated by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The purpose is to protect the accused against a possible apprehension of bias. For example, a Magistrate personally comes to know that A has allegedly committed an offence and takes cognizance of it based on his own knowledge. The Magistrate has therefore become the person who initiates the proceedings based on information personally known to him. To ensure fairness, the law gives the accused an opportunity to ask to transfer his case to another magistrate. This helps maintain the principles of fair trial and judicial impartiality.
Making Over of Cases to Magistrates (S. 212 BNSS):
(2) Any Magistrate of the first class empowered in this behalf by the Chief Judicial Magistrate may, after taking cognizance of an offence, make over the case for inquiry or trial to such other competent Magistrate as the Chief Judicial Magistrate may, by general or special order, specify, and thereupon such Magistrate may hold the inquiry or trial.
This provision deals with the making over (transfer) of a criminal case by a Magistrate after taking cognizance of the offence. It is essentially concerned with which Magistrate will actually conduct the inquiry or trial after cognizance has already been taken. The provision gives this power to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) and, subject to conditions, to certain Magistrates of the first class.
Power of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (S. 212(1) BNSS):
According to Section 212(1) BNSS, any Chief Judicial Magistrate may, after taking cognizance of an offence, make over the case for inquiry or trial to any competent Magistrate subordinate to him.
Under Section 212(1) BNSS, once the Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of an offence, he does not necessarily have to personally conduct the entire inquiry or trial. He can make over the case to another Magistrate who is competent to inquire into or try the offence; and is subordinate to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Not that the Magistrate to whom the case is made over must have the legal competence and jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry or trial.
Power of an empowered Magistrate of the First Class (S. 212(2) BNSS)
This subsection provides a similar power as mentioned in 212(1) BNSS to a Magistrate of the first class, but with additional conditions. A Magistrate of the first class can make over a case only when the Magistrate has been empowered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to do so; the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence; the case is made over to another competent Magistrate; and that other Magistrate is one whom the Chief Judicial Magistrate has specified by general or special order. Once the case is made over, the other Magistrate may conduct the inquiry or trial.
The provision promotes efficient distribution of judicial work. Taking cognizance and conducting the actual inquiry or trial are conceptually different stages. A Magistrate who takes cognizance does not necessarily have to personally conduct the entire case. The law therefore permits the case to be assigned to another competent Magistrate. At the same time, the provision places safeguards on this power by requiring the receiving Magistrate to be competent and, in the case of sub-section (2), to fall within the category of Magistrates specified or authorised by the CJM.
Cognizance of Offences by Court of Session (S. 213 BNSS):
Except as otherwise expressly provided by this Sanhita or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence as a Court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate under this Sanhita.
This provision deals with the power of the Court of Session to take cognizance of offences as a court of original jurisdiction. It establishes the general rule that a Sessions Court ordinarily cannot directly take cognizance of an offence unless the case has first been committed to it by a Magistrate. In other words, where an offence is triable by the Court of Session, the case ordinarily reaches the Sessions Court through the Magistrate. The Sessions Court does not ordinarily receive the case directly as a court of original jurisdiction. However, this restriction does not prevent the Sessions Court from exercising its appellate or revisional jurisdiction, where the law gives it such powers.
The provision creates a procedural division of responsibility between the Magistrate and the Sessions Court. The Magistrate serves as the initial judicial forum, while the Sessions Court deals with offences that are within its trial jurisdiction. This prevents a Sessions Court from ordinarily being approached directly to initiate a criminal trial without the case first passing through the Magistrate as prescribed by law.
Additional Sessions Judges to Try Cases Made Over to Them (S. 214 BNSS):
According to Section 214 BNSS, additional Sessions Judge shall try such cases as the Sessions Judge of the division may, by general or special order, make over to him for trial or as the High Court may, by special order, direct him to try. An Additional Sessions Judge can try a case in two situations: First, when the Sessions Judge of the division makes over the case to him by a general or special order; or second, when the High Court specifically directs him to try the case by a special order.
The Sessions Judge has the power to distribute cases among the judges working within the Sessions Division. The Sessions Judge can make over a case to an Additional Sessions Judge for trial. The Sessions Judge can assign cases either by a general order which prescribes a broader arrangement for allocation of particular categories or classes of cases or by a special order which may relate to a particular case or a specific situation. Therefore, the Sessions Judge has flexibility in distributing cases between the Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judges.
The High Court also has the power to direct an Additional Sessions Judge to try a particular case. However, the provision specifically refers to a special order by the High Court.
The main purpose is to facilitate the efficient distribution of cases within the Sessions Division.
Sessions Courts may have several judges, including the Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judges. Instead of requiring every case to be tried personally by the Sessions Judge, the law allows cases to be distributed to Additional Sessions Judges.
Conclusion:
Cognizance of an offence is a fundamental concept in criminal procedure, as it marks the stage at which a court applies its judicial mind to an alleged offence with a view to initiating proceedings in accordance with law. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) lays down a structured framework governing the manner in which Magistrates and Courts of Session exercise this jurisdiction.
Sections 210 to 214 of the BNSS deal with important aspects of cognizance and the subsequent allocation of criminal cases. Section 210 specifies the circumstances in which a Magistrate may take cognizance of an offence, including on the basis of a complaint, police report, information received from a person other than a police officer, or the Magistrate’s own knowledge. Section 211 provides a safeguard to the accused where cognizance is taken on the basis of information or the Magistrate’s own knowledge. Sections 212 and 213 address the making over of cases by Magistrates and the limitations on the Court of Session taking cognizance as a court of original jurisdiction, while Section 214 deals with the trial of cases assigned to an Additional Sessions Judge.
Taken together, these provisions establish a clear procedural framework for the initiation, transfer, and trial of criminal cases, while seeking to balance judicial efficiency with the rights of the accused and the principles of fair procedure. An understanding of Sections 210 to 214 is therefore essential for appreciating how criminal proceedings move from the stage of cognizance before a Magistrate to the appropriate court for inquiry or trial.