INTRODUCTION
Today, I will talk about the case of Pradeep
S. Wodeyar v. the State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of 2021,
wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed the concept of “cognizance” as
enshrined under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “CrPC”).
DICTIONARY MEANING
But before adverting any further, let us understand
the dictionary meaning of ‘cognizance’. Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition,
defines ‘cognizance’ as “a court’s right and power to try and to determine
cases” or “the taking of judicial or authoritative notice”
or “acknowledgement or admission of an alleged fact.” On the
present show, we will be more concerned with the definition that explains
cognizance as “a court’s right and power to try and to determine cases.”
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Basically, Section 190 of CrPC states that a
Magistrate may take cognizance of any offence when: -
a. The Magistrate receives a complaint of facts
which constitute an offence;
b. There is a police report of such facts; and
c. Information is received from any person other
than a police officer or upon his own knowledge that an offence has been
committed.
Thus, aforestated are the three modes by which cognizance
may be taken under S. 190 by a Magistrate. It “sets out the different
ways in which a Magistrate can take cognizance of an offence, that is to say,
take notice of an allegation disclosing commission of a crime with a view to
setting the law in motion to bring the offender to book.”
But what about the Court of Sessions? How can a
Court of Sessions take cognizance? Till now, we have talked only about cognizance
by Magistrate. According to Section 193 of CrPC, “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.” Thus, usually, a
Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence when such case has been
committed to it by a Magistrate. In case there is any express provision to the contrary
either in the CrPC or any other law, the same shall override the mandate of
Section 193.
In this regard, S. 209 may also be apposite for
perusal. It states that “when a case is instituted either on a police
report or otherwise, and it appears to the Magistrate that the offence is
exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, he shall commit the case to the
Court of Session.”
NATURE AND PURPOSE OF ‘COGNIZANCE’
Further, it is also to be noted that the
expression used in these provisions is ‘cognizance of any offence’. Thus, cognizance
is always of the offence and not the offender. According to the Court, “the
word ‘cognizance’ indicates the point when a Magistrate or a Judge first takes
judicial notice of an offence. It is entirely a different thing from initiation
of proceedings; rather it is the condition precedent to the initiation of
proceedings by the Magistrate or the Judge. Cognizance is taken of cases and
not of persons.”
In the present case, the Court also explained that
“the purpose of taking cognizance of the offence instead of the accused
is because the crime is committed against the society at large. Therefore, the
grievance of the State is against the commission of the offence and not the
offender.”
In view of the Court, “the offender as an
actor is targeted in the criminal procedure to provide punishments so as to
prevent or reduce the crime through different methods such as reformation,
retribution and deterrence. Cognizance is thus taken against the offence and
not the accused since the legislative intent is to prevent crime. The accused
is a means to reach the end of preventing and addressing the commission of
crime.”
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Therefore, in conclusion, following points emerge:
-
a. Cognizance’ is “a court’s right and power
to try and to determine cases.”
b. S. 190 provides for the modes of taking
cognizance by a Magistrate.
c. S. 193 provides that a Court of Session shall
take cognizance of any offence when such case has been committed to it by a Magistrate.
d. S. 209 provides that when a case is triable
exclusively by Court of Session, the Magistrate shall commit the same to the Court
of Session.
e. Cognizance is always of the offence and not the
offender since the legislative intent is to prevent crime.
f. The accused is a means to reach the end of
preventing and addressing the commission of crime.
Thus, I hope that the nature, meaning and scope of
‘cognizance’ under CrPC is clear by now.
No comments:
Post a Comment