Cognizance by Magistrate

By: Hifajatali Sayyed

 Introduction
• When an offence is committed, a citizen has two options; he may
either lodge an FIR before the Police Officer if the offence is a
cognizable one, or he may lodge a complaint before a
competent Judicial Magistrate irrespective of whether the offence
is cognizable or non-cognizable.
• Any Magistrate of the first class and the duly empowered second class
Magistrate may take cognizance of any offence for further proceedings.
• Sections 190 to 199 of CrPC describes the methods by which various
criminal courts are authorised to take cognizance of offences. Sections
195 to 199 put some limitation on filing complaint or taking
cognizance, in regard to certain private offences.
 Introduction
• Taking cognizance in regard to an offence by a competent Magistrate is not
defined or described in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
• The term “taking cognizance” actually means "become aware of", but in
reference to a Court or a Judge, it means "to take notice of judicially".
• In practice ‘taking cognizance’ means taking notice of an offence for
initiation of proceedings under Section 190 of Cr.P.C.
• Cognizance’ refers to the point when the court first takes judicial notice of
an offence by not only applying its mind to the contents of the
complaint/police report, but also proceeding further as provided
further in Chapter XIV of the Cr.P.C.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Sec 190 (1) of CrPC states that any magistrate of the first class
and any magistrate of the second class specially
empowered in this behalf, may take cognizance of any offenses-
a) Upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such an
offense.
b) Upon a police report of such facts.

c) Upon information received from any person other than a

police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such an offense has
been committed.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• The term complaint has been defined in sec 2(d) as
meaning: ‘any allegation made orally or in writing to a
magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this code that
some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an
offence, but does not include a police report.’
• It also explain that a report made by a police officer in a case
which disclose, after investigation, the commission of a non-
cognizable offense shall be deemed to be a complaint; and
the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to
be the complainant.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Ajit Kumar Palit vs. State of W.B (AIR 1963 SC 765)

• In this case, the court stated that, what means taking cognizance
has not been defined in the Code. 
• The word ‘cognizance’ has no esoteric or mystic significance in
Criminal Law or procedure.
• It merely means ‘become aware of’ and when used with
reference to a court or judge. ‘to take notice judicially’.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Pitambar Buhan vs. State of Orissa (1992 CrLJ 645)

• In this case, the court stated taking cognizance includes intention of

initiating a judicial proceeding against an offender in respect of an
offense or taking steps to see whether there is basis for initiating a
judicial proceeding.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Chinnaswami vs. Kuppuswami (AIR 1955 Mad 534)

• Here the court held that ordinarily, a private citizen intending to

initiate criminal proceedings in respect of an offense has two
courses open to him.
• He may lodge an FIR before the police if the offense is cognizable one,
or he may lodge a complaint before a competent judicial magistrate
irrespective of whether the offense is cognizable or non-cognizable.
• The object of the Code is to ensure the freedom and safety of
the subject in that it gives him the right to come to court if he
considers that a wrong has been done to him or to the Republic and be
a check upon police vagaries.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Examination of Complainant:

• Sec 200 states that a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on

complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the
witnesses present, if any, and the substance of such examination
shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant
and the witnesses, and also by the Magistrate.
• The object of such examination is to ascertain whether there is
prima facie case against the person accused of the offence, and to
prevent the issue of process in case of false complaint.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Brahmanand Goyal vs. N.C. Chakraborty [1974 CrLJ 1079
(Cal)]
• In the case, the court held that the provision of sec 200 of CrPC are
not a mere formality, but have been intended by the legislature
to be given effect for the protection of accused persons against
unwarranted complaints.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 P.S. Ramaswamy Nadar vs. R. Vishwanath[1957 CrLJ 673
(Mad)]
• In the case, the court held that sec 200 requires the Magistrate to
examine the complainant and the witness present.
• This duty being imperative, the Magistrate should ask the
complainant whether any witnesses are present. If there is no such
witnesses present, the Magistrate should also record this fact.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Examination of Complainant:

• Sec 200 further states that when the complaint is made in writing,
the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses
—
• (a) if a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of
his official duties or a Court has made the complaint;
• The object of this exception is to prevent the inconvenience which
might be caused to a judge or public servant making a written
complaint.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Examination of Complainant:

• Sec 200 further states that when the complaint is made in writing,
the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses
—
• (b) if the Magistrate makes over the case for inquiry or trial to
another Magistrate under section 192.
• The object behind this exception is that, only one examination of the
complainant and of the witnesses will be considered adequate.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Procedure by Magistrate not competent to take
cognizance of the case.—
• Sec 201 states that if the complaint is made to a Magistrate who is
not competent to take cognizance of the offence, he shall,—
• (a) if the complaint is in writing, return it for presentation to the
proper Court with an endorsement to that effect;
• (b) if the complaint is not in writing, direct the complainant to the
proper Court.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Postponement of issue of process.—

• Sec 202 states that any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an

offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has
been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit, and
shall, in a case where the accused is residing at a place
beyond the area in which he exercises his jurisdiction,
postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire
into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a
police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose
of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Postponement of issue of process.—

• The object of sec 202 is to enable the Magistrate to form an opinion

as to whether the process should be issued or not, and to remove
from his mind hesitation that he may have felt upon the mere
perusal of the complaint and the consideration of the complainant’s
evidence on oath.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Chandra Deo Singh vs. Prakash Chndra Bose [(1963) 2 CrLJ
397]
• In this case the court stated that what the Magistrate has to see is
whether there is evidence in support of the allegations made in the
complaint, and not whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant a
conviction.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Dismissal of Complaint—

• Sec 203 states that if, after considering the statements on oath (if
any) of the complainant and of the witnesses and the result of the
inquiry or investigation (if any) under section 202, the Magistrate
is of opinion that there is no sufficient ground for
proceeding, he shall dismiss the complaint, and in every such case
he shall briefly record his reasons for so doing.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
• Dismissal of Complaint—

• Sec 203 requires that in every case the Magistrate dismisses the
complaint under this section, he shall briefly record his reasons
for doing so.
• Without reasons, it would be almost impossible to determine
whether the Magistrate while dismissing the complaint applied his
mind to the facts, or whether the discretion was properly exercised
or not.
 Cognizance by Magistrate
 Pramatha Nath Talukdar vs. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar [(1962)
1 CrLJ 770]
• In this case, the court stated that the Magistrate must apply his
minds to these materials and then form his judgment as to whether
or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding.