top of page
Question Bank
Question
Explain the legal meaning and significance of "taking cognizance of an offence" under the Criminal Procedure Code. What is the key distinction the judiciary makes regarding what is being taken cognizance of?
Solution
In the context of criminal law, the term "taking cognizance" is a crucial judicial act, though it is not explicitly defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The judiciary has interpreted it to mean when a Magistrate "takes notice of judicially" or "becomes aware of" an offence with a view to initiating legal proceedings. It is not a formal action but occurs the moment a Magistrate applies their mind to the suspected commission of a crime. A fundamental principle established by the courts is that cognizance is taken of an offence and not of the offender. This distinction underscores that the initial judicial focus is on whether the facts presented constitute a recognizable offence, before determining who precisely is liable.
Question
Differentiate between the scope and purpose of an investigation directed under Section 156(3) and an inquiry ordered under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code?
Solution
The CrPC provides Magistrates with different powers at different stages of a case. A direction for investigation under Section 156(3) is a pre-cognizance power. It is essentially a pre-emptory reminder to the police to exercise their plenary powers of investigation, which begins with the registration of an FIR and ends with a report under Section 173. Conversely, an inquiry under Section 202 is a post-cognizance tool. Once a Magistrate has taken cognizance of an offence based on a complaint, they may order an inquiry under this section specifically to decide whether there is sufficient ground to proceed further and issue process against the accused. The scope of a Section 202 inquiry is, therefore, limited to aiding the Magistrate's decision on proceeding with the case.
Question
Under what exceptional circumstances can a Magistrate entertain a second complaint on the same facts after the dismissal of a previous one under Section 203 of the CrPC?
Solution
The dismissal of a complaint under Section 203 of the CrPC, which allows a Magistrate to dismiss a complaint if there is no sufficient ground for proceeding, is generally not an absolute bar to a second complaint on the same facts. However, the judiciary allows a fresh complaint only in exceptional circumstances. These include situations where the previous dismissal order was passed on an incomplete record, was based on a misunderstanding of the complaint, or was manifestly absurd, unjust, or foolish. Furthermore, a second complaint can be entertained if new facts are adduced which could not, with reasonable diligence, have been presented in the first proceeding. The overarching principle is to prevent the abuse of process while ensuring that manifest miscarriage of justice is avoided.
Question
What are the inherent powers of a High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC, and what are the necessary limitations, such as judicial restraint, that govern their exercise?
Solution
Section 482 of the CrPC saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court, or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. These powers are wide and discretionary. However, their exercise is not unbridled and must be guided by the principle of judicial restraint. The courts have consistently held that this power should be used sparingly and cautiously. Unwarranted judicial activism or a belief of self-righteousness in a judge must not lead to orders that travel beyond the scope of the petition, affect the rights of parties not before the court, or overawe other authorities discharging their statutory functions. Judicial restraint is a vital virtue to ensure certainty and the uniform application of law.
Question
What is the responsibility of a Magistrate at the stage of issuing summons to an accused, and how do courts balance the need to prevent frivolous cases with the need to punish the guilty?
Solution
The summoning of an accused is a serious matter that sets the criminal process in motion. Therefore, a Magistrate is obliged to conduct a careful scrutiny of the complaint's allegations before issuing process. This is to prevent a person from being forced to face a frivolous complaint. The courts balance this duty with the equally important object of ensuring that individuals against whom grave allegations are made are prosecuted after a fair trial. This balance is achieved by requiring the Magistrate to apply their mind judicially to the material on record to form a prima facie opinion on whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding. If the Magistrate, after such application of mind, is prima facie satisfied about the commission of an offence, the summons can be legitimately issued.
bottom of page