The Indian legal framework is built on a robust foundation of statutes that ensure justice, fairness, and order within society. One of the cornerstones of this framework is the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which outlines the procedural aspects of criminal law. Among the pivotal sections of the CrPC is Section 190 (Section 210 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (New CRPC), which delineates the powers and procedures related to the cognizance of offences by magistrates.

Section 210 BNSS, 2023.- 
Cognizance of offences by Magistrate.
(1) 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. 
(2) 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.

Understanding Cognizance

Before delving into the specifics of Section 190, it's crucial to grasp the concept of cognizance. In legal terms, cognizance refers to the act of a magistrate taking judicial notice of an offence. This essentially means that the magistrate acknowledges the commission of an offence and initiates legal proceedings against the alleged offender.

Section 190: Key Provisions

Section 190 of the CrPC empowers magistrates to take cognizance of offences in three distinct ways:

1. Cognizance on Complaint (Section 190(1)(a)): This provision allows a magistrate to take cognizance of any offence upon receiving a complaint. A complaint, as defined under the CrPC, is an allegation made orally or in writing to a magistrate, with the intention of taking action under the CrPC, that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offence. It's important to note that a police report does not constitute a complaint.

2. Cognizance on Police Report (Section 190(1)(b)): Under this provision, a magistrate can take cognizance of an offence based on a police report. A police report, also known as a charge sheet, is a document prepared by the police after completing an investigation, detailing the evidence and the conclusions of the investigation.

3. Cognizance on Information Received or Own Knowledge (Section 190(1)(c)): This provision grants a magistrate the authority to take cognizance of an offence upon receiving information from any source other than a complaint or a police report, or even based on the magistrate's own knowledge. This ensures that the magistrate can act in situations where information about an offence comes to light through channels other than the formal complaint or investigation process.

Judicial Discretion and Responsibilities

While Section 190 provides magistrates with the authority to take cognizance of offences, it also places significant responsibility on them to exercise this power judiciously. Magistrates must ensure that there is sufficient material to justify the initiation of legal proceedings. This involves a preliminary assessment of the evidence and circumstances surrounding the alleged offence.

Moreover, the decision to take cognizance is not merely a mechanical process but requires careful consideration of various factors, including the credibility of the information received, the seriousness of the offence, and the potential impact on the accused and the victim.

Implications and Legal Precedents

The significance of Section 190 lies in its role in ensuring that the judicial process is set in motion appropriately and that justice is administered effectively. Over the years, various legal precedents have shaped the interpretation and application of this section.

For instance, the Supreme Court of India, in several landmark judgments, has emphasized the need for magistrates to apply their mind independently and not merely rely on the police report or complaint. The Court has also highlighted that the process of taking cognizance should not be used to harass individuals but should be based on a genuine belief that an offence has been committed.

Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) has been the subject of numerous judicial pronouncements that have clarified its interpretation and application. Here are some leading cases that have shaped the understanding of Section 190:

1. R. R. Chari v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1951)

Citation: AIR 1951 SC 207

Key Takeaway: The Supreme Court clarified that "taking cognizance" does not imply any formal action or decision but merely the magistrate applying his mind to the suspected commission of an offence. This landmark judgment emphasized the need for judicial application of mind before initiating proceedings.

2. Gopal Das Sindhi v. State of Assam (1961)

Citation: AIR 1961 SC 986

Key Takeaway: This case elaborated on the concept of "taking cognizance," indicating that it means the magistrate has applied his mind to the offence for the purpose of proceeding under the law. The Supreme Court distinguished between taking cognizance and the subsequent steps like issuing process or summons.

3. Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy v. Narayana Reddy (1976)

Citation: AIR 1976 SC 1672

Key Takeaway: The Supreme Court discussed the circumstances under which a magistrate could take cognizance of an offence based on a police report. It was clarified that the magistrate has discretion to take cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) even if the police report suggests that no offence has been committed.

4. Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police (1985)

Citation: AIR 1985 SC 1285

Key Takeaway: This case addressed the issue of the magistrate’s role when the police submit a report under Section 173 indicating that no offence appears to have been committed. The Supreme Court held that the magistrate must give the complainant an opportunity to be heard before deciding not to take cognizance.

5. State of Karnataka v. Pastor P. Raju (2006)

Citation: AIR 2006 SC 2825

Key Takeaway: The Supreme Court reiterated that while taking cognizance, the magistrate is not required to record detailed reasons. However, the application of judicial mind must be evident from the circumstances. This case highlighted that the magistrate must be satisfied that there is prima facie evidence of the commission of an offence.

6. Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh (2012)

Citation: AIR 2012 SC 1185

Key Takeaway: This case dealt with the question of whether the magistrate can direct the police to investigate further even after taking cognizance based on a complaint. The Supreme Court held that the magistrate has such power under Section 156(3) CrPC to ensure a thorough investigation.

7. Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2015)

Citation: AIR 2015 SC 923

Key Takeaway: In this case, the Supreme Court discussed the scope of Section 190(1)(b) in the context of summoning individuals. It was held that a magistrate should not mechanically summon persons as accused and must ensure that there is sufficient material to proceed against them.

Conclusion

Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code is a pivotal provision that empowers magistrates to take cognizance of offences, thereby initiating the judicial process. By providing multiple avenues for taking cognizance—through complaints, police reports, and other information—it ensures that justice is accessible and responsive to various situations. However, with this power comes the responsibility to exercise judicial discretion judiciously, ensuring that the legal process is used to uphold justice and prevent misuse.

Share this News