The expression ‘taking cognizance of an offence’ has nowhere been defined in the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C./Code”). The Courts, through

various judicial pronouncements, have shed light on its meaning. In the case of R.R Chari v.
State of U.P., it was held by the Apex Court 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.”
It has been stated to mean that the initiation of proceedings against a person commences on
taking cognizance of an offence by the Magistrate. The Magistrate can take cognizance of an
offence under one of the three contingencies mentioned under Section 190 of Cr.P.C i.e. firstly,
on a complaint of an aggrieved person; secondly, upon receiving a police report (as defined
under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C.) and lastly, upon receiving information from any person (other
than a police officer), or when Magistrate himself takes notice of an offence.
However, when cognizance is take upon a complaint made by any person, it is critical to
examine the complainant to ensure that the complaint is genuine before starting the trial and
summoning an accused. What this means is that frivolous and vexatious cases that are just meant
to harass an accused must be weeded out.

After taking of cognizance of any complaint by the Court, the complaint is either admitted under
section 200 crpc or dismissed under section 203 crpc. If the complaint is admitted by the court
then the court shall commence the proceeding in respect of the concerned complaint under
sections 204-210 of CRPC.