Criminal courts.

There are many different types of courts and many ways

to classify and describe them. One of the types is of
criminal courts.

Criminal courts deal with people accused of committing

a crime, deciding whether they are guilty and, if so,
determining the consequences they shall suffer. The
prosecution of alleged offenders is generally pursued in
the name of the public, because crimes are considered
offenses not just against individual victims but also
against society at large.
The public is represented by an official such as a district
attorney often called a  procurator, or police officer.
Although courts are also agencies of the state, they are
neutral in criminal proceedings, favouring neither the
prosecution nor the defence. The impartiality of the
court is strongly reinforced where juries are used to
decide the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

The role of the criminal court in civil-law systems is

quite different from its role in common-law ones. Civil-
law countries assign a more active role to the judge and
a more passive role to counsel.
Instead of being passive recipients of evidence produced
by the prosecution and the defence, judges in civil-law
systems often direct the presentation of evidence and
even order that certain evidence be produced. Thus,
procedure in civil-law systems is
considered inquisitorial. Judges in this system have an
independent responsibility to discover the facts.
In the common-law courts, adversary procedures tend
to prevail; the lawyers for both sides bear primary
responsibility for producing evidence and do most of the
questioning of witnesses.
Advocates of the adversarial system hold that a just
outcome is most likely to result when all possible
relevant information—good (tending to exonerate) and
bad (tending to incriminate)—is placed before an
impartial adjudicator which is the judge or the jury.
Self-interest motivates both the defence and the
prosecution to provide all possible evidence relevant to
its side of the case. Where the jury system is used, the
jury is supposed to constitute an unbiased sample of
ordinary people predisposed to favouring neither the
defence nor the prosecution, and the judge serves as a
“legal referee” who ensures that proper legal procedures
are followed (e.g., barring the introduction of illegally
obtained evidence, such as coerced confessions, or other
information deemed inadmissible).
The adversarial system, and its
associated conception of justice, is a pillar of the
common-law tradition, as evidenced in the U.S., British,
and Canadian systems of criminal justice.

If a defendant is found guilty, he is sentenced, again

according to law and within limits predetermined by
legislation. The objective of most punishment is not so
much to wreak vengeance upon the offender as to
rehabilitate him and to deter others from committing
similar acts.
Hence, the most common sentences are fines, short
terms of imprisonment, and probation which allows the
offender freedom under state supervision.

The various classes of criminal courts in India are:

 Supreme Court.
  High Courts.
 The Courts of Session.
 The Judicial Magistrates of the First Class, and, in
any metropolitan area; the Metropolitan
Magistrates.
 The Judicial Magistrates of the Second Class.
 The Executive Magistrates.

Supreme Court.
the Supreme Court of India is the supreme judicial authority and
the highest court of the Republic of India. It is the final court of
appeal for all civil and criminal cases in. It also has the power
of judicial review. The Supreme Court, which consists of the Chief
Justice of India and a maximum of fellow 33 judges, has extensive
powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions.
Its decisions are binding on other Indian courts as well as the union
and state governments.[7]As per the Article 142 of the Constitution, the
court is conferred with the inherent jurisdiction to pass any order
deemed necessary in the interest of complete justice which becomes
binding on the President to enforce. The Supreme Court replaced
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the highest court of
appeal since 28 January 1950.

The Supreme Court of India was constituted as per Chapter IV

of the Part V of Constitution of India. The fourth Chapter of
the Indian Constitution is " The Union Judiciary". Under this
Chapter, the Supreme Court of India is vested with all
Jurisdiction.
As per Article 124, The Supreme Court of India had been
Constituted and Established.
As per Article 129, the Supreme Court is to be the Court of
Record.
As per Article 131, the Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court is authorized.
As per Articles 132, 133, 134 the Appellate Jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court is authorized.
Under Article 135, Federal Court's Power is given to the
Supreme Court.
Article 136 is dealing with the Special leave to Appeal to the
Supreme Court. Review Power of the Supreme Court is
explained in Article 137.
Article 138 deals with the Enlargement of the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court.
Article 139 deals with the Conferment on the Supreme Court
of powers to issue certain writs. Ancillary powers of Supreme
Court is given as per Article 140

Presently, the Members of Collegium are:

 Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
 Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul
 Justice K. M. Joseph
 Justice Ajay Rastogi
 Justice Sanjiv Khanna


 The Constitution seeks to ensure the independence of

Supreme Court judges in various ways.
 As Per Article 50 of directive principles of state policy,
the state shall take steps to separate the judiciary from
the executive. Independence of the judiciary, the
supremacy of the constitution and rule of law are the
features of the basic structure of the Constitution.
 The Supreme Court and high courts are empowered to
frame suo moto cases without receiving the formal
 petitions/complaints on any suspected injustice including
actions/acts indulging in contempt of court and contempt
of the Constitution by the executive, legislators, citizens,
etc. It is considered one of the most independent courts in
the whole South East Asia.

High courts of India

The high courts of India are the highest courts of appellate
jurisdiction in each state and union territory of India.
However, a high court exercises its original civil and criminal
jurisdiction only if the subordinate courts are not authorized
by law to try such matters for lack of pecuniary, territorial
jurisdiction. High courts may also enjoy original jurisdiction
in certain matters, if so designated specially[1] by
the constitution, a state or union law.
Judges in a high court are appointed by the president of
India in consultation with the chief justice of India and
the governor of the state under Article 217 of the Constitution
but through subsequent judicial interpretations, the primacy of
the appointment process is on the hands of the Judicial
Collegium. High courts are headed by a chief justice. 
The Calcutta High Court is the oldest high court in the
country, established on 2 July 1862. High courts that handle
numerous cases of a particular region have permanent benches
established there. Benches are also present in states which
come under the jurisdiction of a court outside its territorial
limits. Smaller states with few cases may have circuit benches
established. Circuit benches (known as circuit courts in some
parts of the world) are temporary courts which hold
proceedings for a few selected months in a year. Thus cases
built up during this interim period are judged when the circuit
court is in session. According to a study conducted
by Bangalore-based N.G.O, Daksh, on 21 high courts in
collaboration with the Ministry of Law and Justice in March
2015, it was found that average pendency of a case in high
courts in India is 3 years.

Sessions Court
A Sessions Court or even known as the Court of Sessions
Judge is a court of law which exists in
several Commonwealth countries.
A Court of Session is the highest criminal court in a district
and the court of first instance for trying serious offences, i.e.,
those carrying punishment of imprisonment of more than
seven years, life imprisonment, or death.

In Indian cities, the Sessions Court is responsible for

adjudicating matters related to criminal cases.[7] The court is
responsible for cases relating to murders, theft, dacoity, pick-
pocketing and other such cases.
In Mumbai there are two courts, the main one being in
the Kala Ghoda region of South Mumbai, the second in
Dindoshi in the suburban area of Goregaon.[8]
Sessions court has the power to impose the full range of
penalties for criminal acts, including the death penalty.[9]
Originally, the Sessions Courts heard each case continuously
in sessions and delivered judgements immediately on
completion of arguments.
Hence the name 'Sessions Court' meant that the cases would
be disposed of expeditiously. One of the important reasons for
delays in the Indian and Pakistani Judicial System, is that the
concept of 'Sessions' is observed only in breach due to
repeated adjournments, loop holes in the case papers and
backlog of cases. The Government of India has not found a
solution to this endemic problem.

Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First

Class

Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First

Class or Judicial First Class Magistrate
Courts or Judicial Magistrate First Class Courts are
at the second lowest level of the Criminal Court structure
in India. According to the Section 11 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPc), a Court of Judicial
Magistrate of First Class may be established by the
State Government in consultation with the High Court of
the respective state at such places in the district and in
any number by a notification. [1]
According to Section 15 of the CrPc, a judicial
magistrate is under the general control of the Sessions
Judge and is subordinate to the Chief Judicial
Magistrate. [2]
According to Section 29 of the CrPc., a Judicial
Magistrate of First Class may pass a sentence of
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or of
fine not exceeding ten thousand rupees or of both. [3]
Courts of Metropolitan Magistrates

Courts of Metropolitan Magistrates is a type of

magistrate courts those are situated in a division
headquarter or metropolitan city, found in many
countries (e.g., India, Bangladesh[2]).
The presiding officers of such Courts get appointed by
the High Court.
The High court appoints Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
for every metropolitan court. The High court may also
appoint Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for an
area, with all or any of the powers of a Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, as may be directed by the High
Court. Other than Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, there are also
Metropolitan Magistrates also known as Magistrate of
the first class who work as subordinates of Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate. Any two or more metropolitan
magistrates may, subject to the rules made by the CMM,
sit together as a bench. All metropolitan magistrates
including the ACMMs and benches of general
magistrates are subordinate to the CMM.

Courts of Judicial Magistrate of Second Class

Courts of Judicial Magistrate of Second Class are at the
lowest hierarchy of the Criminal Court structure in India.[1] 
According to the Section 11 of the Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 (CrPc), a Court of Judicial Magistrate of Second Class
may be established by the State Government in consultation
with the High Court of the respective state at such places in
the district and in any number by a notification
.
According to Section 29(3) of the CrPC., a Judicial Magistrate
of Second Class may pass a sentence of imprisonment for a
term not exceeding one year, or of fine not exceeding Five
thousand (in madhya pradesh 25 thousand)  rupees, or of both.

A Judicial Magistrate of Second Class cannot entertain a

Prayer for Police Remand while hearing for police files. If the
police remand prayer is received, the same must be kept
reserved and the case record must immediately be sent to
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class.

A Judicial Magistrate can try such offences which is triable by

either "Any Magistrate" or "Judicial Magistrate 2nd Class" as
enshrined in the Schedule I & II of the Cr.PC.

Generally, the post for Judicial Magistrate 2nd Class is to be

held for 6 months by the newly inducted officers unless the
concerned Hon'ble High Court of a State pleased to seem fit to
reduce or increase the time period of 6 months.

The Executive Magistrates.

each state appoints executive magistrates (Tehsildars) in
every district and in every metropolitan area. In each
administrative district there are:
 A District Magistrate (DM)

 2 or more Additional District Magistrates (ADM)

  4 or more Sub-divisional District Magistrates (SDM) and
 At least 10 Executive Magistrates

An Executive Magistrate is an officer of the Executive branch. He or she has
powers under both Indian Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code.
An Executive Magistrate requires a person arrested on the orders of a court
outside the local jurisdiction to be produced before him and he has the power to
set the bail amount and impose conditions on the individual to avoid police
custody as per the terms of the warrant.

Section 133 of Crpc

It enables the Magistrate to issue a conditional order for the removal of
nuisance. He can do so on the receiving the report of a police officer or other
information backed by evidence. The powers under this section include:
 Removal of an obstruction from a public place.
o An illegal construction blocking the road.
o Settlements without permission in slum areas, along river banks etc.
 Prohibition or regulation of trade or occupation injurious to public health.
o Prohibition of selling of cigarettes around school areas.
o Prohibition or regulation of industries in residential areas
 Prevent or stop the construction of buildings or disposal of substance that
is likely to explode or be harmful or might collapse giving an
apprehension of damage to the public.
 To order any dangerous animal to be destroyed, confined or disposed of
in any manner deemed essential.

Section 145 of CrpC
If an Executive Magistrate is satisfied from report of a police officer or any other
information that a dispute concerning land or water or its boundaries can cause
a breach of peace, he makes an order in writing requiring the concerned parties
to attend his court.

The magistrate then hears the parties, examines the evidence and decides which
of the parties was in possession of the property subject to dispute. If a
magistrate finds that if a party has forcibly or wrongfully dispossessed, he treats
the party such that it had possession on the date of his order.
Hence, we can see in certain matters going to an Executive Magistrate provides
faster resolution that going to a Civil Court. Moreover, he acts as a guardian of
public and is essential to the maintenance of law and order.

Power of the Court to pass sentences

Sentences which the High Courts and Session Judges of India may
pass
According to Section 28, a High Court in India may pass any sentence
authorised by law. A Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge
may pass any punishment permitted by the law, but any sentence of
death given by any such judge shall be subject to confirmation by the
High Court of India.

An Assistant Sessions Judge may choose to pass any sentence as

authorised by the law except a sentence of death or one regarding
imprisonment for life or of imprisonment for a term that exceeds ten
years.

Therefore, Section 26 of the Criminal Procedure Code enumerates the

types of Courts in India in which various offences can be tried and
then under Section 28, it spells out the limits of the sentences which
such Courts are authorised to pass.

Sentence Imprisonment in Default of Penalty

When a fine is imposed on an accused, and it has not been paid, the
law provides that the accused can be imprisoned for a term in addition
to substantive imprisonment awarded to him, if any. Section 30 of the
Criminal Procedure Code defines the limits of the Magistrate’s
powers to award imprisonment in concern to the default of payment
of the penalty.
It states that the Court of a Magistrate may impose such a term of
imprisonment in default of payment of a penalty as is authorised by
the law provided that the term is as follows.

1. The term is not more than the powers of the Magistrate under
Section 29.
2. The term where the imprisonment has been awarded as a part of
the substantive sentence. This term should not exceed 1/4th of
the time in prison which the Magistrate is competent to inflict as
a punishment for the offence than as imprisonment in concern to
the default of payment of the fine.

Conviction of several offences at one trial

Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Court relates to the quantum of
punishment which the Court is authorised to impose where the
accused is convicted of two or more crimes at one hearing.

FAMOUS COURT CASES OF INDIA

 Murder and killings
o The Tarakeswar affair (1874)
o The murder of ghosts – Ram Bahadur Thapa (1959) 
o The Nanavati murder case (1959)
o The contract killing of Mrs Vidya Jain (1967)
o Tandoor murders (1995)
o The murder of Neeraj Grover (2008)
o D.K. Basu and custodial deaths
 Cases where children were the victim
o Renuka Shinde and Seema Gavit : Child Killers (1990-
1996)
o The Billa – Ranga Case (1978)
 Cases that triggered changes in Indian rape laws
o The rape of Mathura (1972)
 o Bhanwari Devi rape case (1992)
o The Nirbhaya gang-rape (2012)
 Bizzare identity crimes
o Lal Bihari identity case (1975-1994)
o Bhawal Case (1920-1946)
 Criminal defamation
o Personal opinion or defamation: the Khusboo case
(2010)
 Scandalous scams 
o Collapse of Kingfisher 
o The Harsha Mehta scam
o 2G Spectrum case
o Coalgate scam
o Satyam scam
o The BOFORS scandal
o PNB Bank, Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi