Exploring The Pillars Of Justice - Analysing The Concept Of Cognizance In Indian Criminal Law

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Criminal Law

Published: 2026-08-23T19:47:19.257Z

Updated: 2026-08-30T07:06:06.104Z

EXPLORING THE PILLARS OF JUSTICE: ANALYSING THE

CONCEPT OF COGNIZANCE IN INDIAN CRIMINAL LAW M Mohit Prem Kumar, Christ (Deemed to be University) Pune, Lavasa Campus

Introduction

The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973, is a set of procedural laws that works together with the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to facilitate justice. The IPC provides for what constitutes as an offence and the CrPC provides the procedural aspect of how to proceed with a case, the working of both in a cohesive manner is essential for delivering justice. Taking cognizance is the application of judicial mind to a case. This is done by the magistrate which serves as a medium between the police after completion of the investigation and the initiation of trial against the accused. This article explores the concept of cognizance through analysis of the procedures laid down by the CrPC. What is taking cognizance Taking cognizance is not mentioned in the Criminal Procedure Code 1973(CrPC) but instead was observed in the case of RR Chari v. State of Maharashtra.

The Apex Court in this case held that “Taking cognizance does not mean any formal action or expected action of any kind but occurs as soon as a magistrate as such involves his mind to the suspected commission of an offence. ” Though there is no definition of taking cognizance under CrPC the procedural and limitation aspect of it is covered under Sections 190 to 199. The initiation of taking cognizance through notice is covered under Sec 190 of CrPC. Taking cognizance means taking into consideration or into the knowledge of the court. Cognizance occurs when the court becomes aware of the commission of the offence. When such information comes into the knowledge of the magistrate, the magistrate then applies his mind. Application of mind refers to judicial mind in relation to the facts and circumstances of the case.

An essential factor in taking cognizance is the police report which states the charges framed against the accused. If the magistrate finds sufficient reason after taking cognizance, then the magistrate shall begin criminal trial, similarly if there is no sufficient reason found then the trial will be dismissed Cognizable offences Cognizable offences are those where the police officer can perform arrest by taking a person into custody for an offence committed without the permission of the Court. The condition for cognizable offence is that the offence must be of a serious and heinous nature. Some offences that fall under this purview are rape and murder. After apprehending the accused the police officer must file a FIR (first information report).

When performing an arrest for a cognizable offence the police officer also has the power to conduct preliminary investigation up to a certain extent. Persons who can take cognizance of an offence There are two persons who can take cognizance of an offence, they are an ordinary citizen and the magistrate. An ordinary citizen takes cognizance of an offence through the procedure of filing an FIR in a police station who has competent territorial jurisdiction or the citizen can directly file a complaint to a competent magistrate in events where the police officer refuses to accept the FIR. A magistrate can take cognizance through the procedure laid down under the sections 190 to 199 of the CrPC.

Taking cognizance under the code Under section 190(1) a magistrate can take cognizance of an offence when such information of the offence is brought to him through receiving a complaint, police report submitted to him, and through information of the offence received through someone or through his own knowledge. Section 190(2) refers to the empowerment of a second-class magistrate to take cognizance, but the second-class magistrate must be empowered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to do so. Section 191 refers to when a magistrate takes cognizance through a person other than a police officer, or through his own knowledge. In such situation the accused can request for the transfer of the judicial magistrate, which means the accused requests for a different judicial magistrate to oversee the proceeding. Such application must be made before taking of evidence.

Section 192 deals with making over of cases. Here the Chief Judicial Magistrate can give the case to a competent subordinate for inquiry or trial. The Chief Judicial Magistrate can also give orders for taking over a case to a judicial magistrate of first class for inquiry or trial. Section 193 states that the courts of sessions cannot take cognizance of an offence unless the case has been given to it by a magistrate, this is because the court lacks the original jurisdiction to do so. Limitations on taking cognizance The limitations on taking cognizance are prescribed under sections 195 to 199 of the CrPC. These limitations exist to create a legal boundary for the power bestowed upon the courts to take cognizance. The power of a court to take cognizance is not the same as the power of the court to try a case.

A great example would be the sessions court where it may have the power to try a case but without the Chief Judicial Magistrate assigning the case it cannot take cognizance. Section 195(1)(a) states that Courts are prohibited from taking cognizance of offences that are punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). These offences can be taken cognizance for only when there is a written complaint lodged by the public servant mentioned in the aforesaid sections of the Indian Penal Code Section 195(1)(b) prohibits the court from taking cognizance in cases of conspiracy or abetment to offences against public justice. It further prohibits the court from taking cognizance in case of conspiracy or abetment to offences punishable under Sections 471, 475 and 476 of the IPC unless there is a written complaint made to a court where that court is a subordinate.

195(2) prohibits the court from proceeding with the trial when the order of withdrawal is given by a superior officer of a public servant. Section 196(1) prohibits the court from taking cognizance in those cases under Chapter VI or under Section 153A, 153B, 203 or 505 of IPC. There however is an exception present where the consent of the central government or the state government is obtained. Section 196(2) sets out the procedure for prosecution of conspiracy that aims to commit offence against the state. The sections prohibit courts from having the authority to take cognizance for offences that fall under section 120 B of IPC unless the consent of the state government or the district magistrate is obtained.

Section 197 states that a prior sanction is required from an officer who is competent so as to prosecute a government or public servant for any crime done when discharging his official duty. Section 198 of the CrPC prescribes an exception to the general rule where a complaint can be filed by anybody even if the said person is not connected to the victim. The sections states that only the aggrieved person or the person specified under the section in relation to a complaint for an offence relating to marriage. There is also a prohibition under this section for the magistrate to conduct inquiry in cases on marriage on his own motion, the magistrate can only do so when by way of complaint the to the magistrate the case is placed before him.

Procedure after taking Cognizance There are two outcomes which can after a competent magistrate takes cognizance through application of mind under section 190 i) such cognizance can be taken, ii) cognizance cannot be said to be taken. I.

Such cognizance can be taken When cognizance is said to be taken the magistrate proceeds with examination under section 200. If the court is not competent to take cognizance, then as under section 201 the case will be transferred. If there is no sufficient reason found then the case will be dismissed as under section 203 of the code. If there is sufficient reason there will begin the issue of process under section 204. II.

Cognizance cannot be said to be taken The magistrate first orders investigation of the case under section 156(3) or issues a search warrant under section 93. This is done to gather sufficient evidence to determine if there is a sufficient cause to proceed. When it is concluded that there is no sufficient reason to believe or if there is no sufficient evidence through ascertaining that the report by the police is insufficient then the magistrate can issue reinvestigation. When it is confirmed that a sufficient reason does not exist then the court will proceed with dismissal as under section 203. But after investigation there arise sufficient reasons to take cognizance then the court will proceed with the procedure where such cognizance can be taken as under the point above. Complaint I.

Section 200- The complaint is given to the magistrate by the complainant directly to the magistrate through word of or through a written medium. The magistrate after taking cognizance of offence examines both the complainant and the witness. Such examination is then further reduced to writing by the competent magistrate. After the complaint is reduced to writing the document is signed by the parties and the magistrate. If such complaint is already written such complaint need not be reduced into writing. II.

Section 201- If the complaint made to the magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance there are two situations that can arise. • If the complaint is in writing the magistrate can order for presentation of the complaint before the proper court. • If the complaint is not in writing the magistrate can direct the complaint to the proper court. III.

Section 202- If the magistrate is competent to take cognizance, then if he sees fit the magistrate can postpone the examination to a later date to facilitate further inquiry and direct investigation to see if there are sufficient grounds for proceeding. Police Report The definition of police report is defined under section 2(r) of CrPC, it is defined as a report forwarded by the police officer as under section 173(2). The procedural aspect of the police report in regards to cognizance is dealt with by section 173 of CrPC, where the aspect of investigation is expounded upon. The section states that investigation must be completed without delay and must be recorded by the police officer in charge. Once the investigation is completed the report of such investigation must be forwarded to the magistrate with the authority to take cognizance of the offence.

The form of the report must be in a manner as prescribed by the state government. If the police office is unaware if the offence is cognizable or non-cognizable then the police officer may continue investigation as under section 2(d) of CrPC where the report made by the police officer is in regards to investigation of the commission of a non-cognizable offence through a complaint from the complainant. After submitting the report, the court will further determine after examination under section 200 of CrPC.

The basic procedure is as follows, after the submission of the report by the police officer as per section 2(r), the report is then forwarded to the magistrate under section 173(2), the magistrate then takes cognizance under section 190(1)(b), and then proceeds with the issue of process under section 204 if there are sufficient grounds, if there are insufficient grounds then there will be dismissal of the case as under section 203. Magistrates Discretion The cognizant magistrate is bestowed upon the discretion to agree or disagree with the report filed by the police officer as under section 173 of CrPC. If the magistrate is satisfied with the report filed after further investigation by the police officer the magistrate can take cognizance by agreeing or disagreeing with the report.

In case the magistrate disagrees with the report he must send a notice to the informant or aggrieved person in case of closure of the report. Failure to provide such notice is illegal. This discretion was recognised in the case of Balwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police. Private person or Suo Moto Under section 190 (1)(c) the magistrate can take cognizance on the information received from a person other than the police or the information from his own knowledge. This provision exists so that there is proper justice delivered even if the aggrieved party is unable to prosecute due to circumstances preventing him from doing so. Such action must be taken by a magistrate who is not personally interested as under the section. This means that the magistrate must not be a witness to the offence or must not be a related party to the parties in the case.

Cognizance by magistrate not empowered When there is cognizance taken by the magistrate who is not empowered to do so or if the court is not competent to transfer the case to a court of competency by means of submittal, committal or making over then the order would not be set aside and not overseen in two scenarios • If such cognizance taken by the magistrate is done by error and in good faith then the order will not be set aside and instead will be transferred to a magistrate who is competent by means of submittal, committal or making over. • If such cognizance taken by the magistrate is done knowingly then the order given by such magistrate will be held as void and will have no effect on the parties.

For further explanation of transfer of case by means of submittal, committal or making over • Submittal is when a case is transferred from a lower court to a court that is in immediate higher authority. This is provided for under sections 209, 323 and 325 of CrPC. • Committal is when the case is transferred from a lower court skipping all immediate higher authorities and is transferred directly to the court of sessions. This is provided for under sections 209, 323 and 325 of CrPC. • Making over is when a case is transferred to a subordinate magistrate who is competent, such competency of a subordinate court is decided by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. This procedure is provided for under section 192 of CrPC. Transfer of cases after taking cognizance Transfer of cases after taking cognizance can occur in certain situation and is provided for under CrPC. I.

On application of accused – Under section 191(1)(c) before taking evidence the possibility of trying the case in another court must be informed to the complainant. If the complainant chooses to transfer the case to another court with jurisdiction, then the case shall be transferred to the other magistrate. Not informing of such possibility of transfer the case is illegal.

II.

Power of Chief Judicial Magistrate to transfer- After taking cognizance the Chief Judicial Magistrate can make over the case to a court of subordinate jurisdiction which is competent as under section 191(1) of the CrPC. It must be noted that the order given under this section is not of administrative nature. III.

Magistrate is empowered to transfer- Under section 192(2) of CrPC the magistrate of first class can transfer the case after taking cognizance to a competent magistrate on the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Procedure to condone dela In case of delay by the magistrate in taking cognizance there are certain procedures that need to be followed. Firstly, the reason for such delay must be stated, such reason must be of a satisfactory nature. Secondly, a notice must be sent to the accused regarding the delay and further the reason for the delay must also be stated in the notice. Thirdly, the reason for the delay must be stated and recorded by the court. Conclusion The process of taking cognizance, though not explicitly defined in the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973, is a pivotal step in the dispensation of justice in India.

Through a meticulous analysis of the provisions laid down in the CrPC, it becomes evident that cognizance marks the commencement of judicial scrutiny into alleged criminal offenses. This crucial phase involves the application of judicial mind by a magistrate, either upon receipt of a complaint, police report, or through personal knowledge. Cognizance, as observed by the Supreme Court, is not merely a formal action but signifies the moment when the court acknowledges the suspected commission of an offense. It triggers a series of legal actions, including the initiation of criminal trials if sufficient grounds are found. The concept of cognizance encompasses both cognizable offenses, where immediate police action is permitted, and non-cognizable offenses, which require court intervention for investigation and further proceedings.

The limitations on taking cognizance, delineated in the CrPC, serve as legal safeguards to prevent arbitrary exercise of judicial power. These restrictions ensure that the court's authority is exercised judiciously and in accordance with established legal principles. Additionally, provisions for the transfer of cases, condoning delays, and addressing complaints from private individuals underscore the importance of procedural fairness and access to justice. In essence, the process of taking cognizance embodies the essence of judicial diligence and impartiality. It marks the foundational stage where the wheels of justice begin to turn, paving the way for a thorough examination of facts and eventual adjudication.

As the cornerstone of criminal proceedings, cognizance reflects the commitment of the Indian legal system to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of both the accused and the aggrieved.