Law and You >Procedural Laws > BNSS > Offences Committed by Means of Electronic Communications, Letters, etc. (S. 202 BNSS)
List of Sub-Topics:
- Introduction
- Place of Trial in Cases of Cheating and Dishonest Inducement (S. 201(1))
- Territorial Jurisdiction for Offences under Section 82 BNS (S. 202(2))
- Conclusion
- Related Topics
Offences Committed by Means of Electronic Communications, Letters, etc. (S. 202 BNSS):
The rapid development of electronic communication has transformed the manner in which individuals interact, exchange information, conduct business, and express opinions. Electronic mail, text messages, social-media platforms, instant-messaging applications, and other digital communication systems have made the transmission of information faster and more accessible than ever before. However, the same technologies may also be misused to facilitate unlawful acts, including threats, intimidation, harassment, defamation, obscenity, fraud, and the dissemination of harmful or prohibited material.
Offences committed through electronic communications present distinctive legal challenges because the medium of communication can transcend geographical boundaries, permit rapid and widespread dissemination, and sometimes make it difficult to identify the person responsible. Traditional legal principles concerning communications made through letters, written documents, or other forms of correspondence must therefore be considered alongside the technological characteristics of modern electronic media.
The regulation of such conduct seeks to strike a balance between protecting individuals and society from unlawful or harmful communications and safeguarding legitimate freedom of speech and expression. This article examines the nature and scope of offences committed by means of electronic communications, letters, and related forms of communication, with particular attention to the legal principles governing such offences, the evidentiary and jurisdictional issues they raise, and the challenges involved in their investigation and prosecution. It also considers how existing legal frameworks can respond to evolving methods of communication while maintaining fairness and due process.
Place of Trial in Cases of Cheating and Dishonest Inducement (S. 201(1) BNSS):
According to Section 202(1) BNSS, any offence which includes cheating, may, if the deception is practised by means of electronic communications or letters or telecommunication messages, be inquired into or tried by any Court within whose local jurisdiction such electronic communications or letters or messages were sent or were received; and any offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction the property was delivered by the person deceived or was received by the accused person.
This provision is about which court has territorial jurisdiction to try an offence of cheating, especially when the cheating happens through electronic or written communication. The provision creates two main situations:
As per the first situation, if the cheating involves deception through email, WhatsApp/SMS or other telecommunication messages, letters, or other electronic communications, then the case can be tried by a court in either the place where the communication was sent, or the place where the communication was received.
For example, A person in Delhi sends a fraudulent WhatsApp message to B in Mumbai, falsely claiming that B has won a prize. Thus, the message was sent from Delhi and the message was received in Mumbai. Therefore, a court in Delhi or Mumbai may have territorial jurisdiction under this provision.
The second part deals with the more specific offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. The case may be tried where the deceived person delivered the property, or the accused person received the property.
For example, A in Pune falsely convinces B in Mumbai to transfer ₹5 lakh to A’s bank account. B delivered the property/money from Mumbai. A received the money in Pune. Therefore, the case may be tried by a court in Mumbai or Pune, assuming the other jurisdictional requirements are satisfied.
Territorial Jurisdiction for Offences under Section 82 BNS (S. 202(2) BNSS):
According to Section 202(2) BNSS, any offence punishable under section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction the offence was committed or the offender last resided with his or her spouse by the first marriage, or the wife by the first marriage has taken up permanent residence after the commission of the offence.
This provision deals with territorial jurisdiction for an offence punishable under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Section 82 concerns marrying again during the lifetime of a husband or wife in circumstances where the subsequent marriage is void because the first spouse is still living.
The provision allows the case to be inquired into or tried by a court in any of three places:
- Where the Offence was Committed: The ordinary place where the second marriage/commission of the offence took place.
- Where the Offender Last Resided with His or Her Spouse from the First Marriage: If the accused and the first spouse had been living together, the court at the place where they last lived together can also have jurisdiction.
- Where the First Wife has Permanently Settled After the Offence: If the wife from the first marriage moves to another place and takes up permanent residence after the offence was committed, a court in that place can also try the case.
For example, suppose A is already married to B, and B is his first wife.A subsequently marries C in Delhi, while B is still alive and the subsequent marriage falls within Section 82 BNS.A and B had last lived together in Mumbai. After the second marriage, B permanently settles in Pune. The case may be tried by a court in Delhi (where the offence was committed); in Mumbai (where A last resided with B, his first wife); or in Pune (where B, the first wife, took up permanent residence after the offence).
The purpose is to avoid restricting the prosecution to only the place where the second marriage took place. In these cases, the first spouse may be living somewhere else, and therefore the law recognizes additional territorial connections with the offence. So, the provision essentially widens the territorial jurisdiction for cases involving the offence under Section 82 BNS.
Conclusion:
Section 202 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides an important rule of territorial jurisdiction for offences committed through electronic communications, letters and similar means. Such offences may extend beyond a single geographical location because the communication may originate in one place while being received or acted upon elsewhere. By recognizing these different territorial connections, the provision facilitates effective inquiry and trial without allowing the physical distance between the offender and the recipient to create unnecessary jurisdictional difficulties. The Section also deals with territorial jurisdiction for an offence punishable under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.