Question

differentiate between:-
i. bailable and non-bailable offence

Introduction
The Indian criminal justice system categorizes offences into bailable and non-bailable
offences, a classification that significantly influences the rights of the accused and the nature
of judicial proceedings. Understanding this distinction is essential for comprehending legal
rights and obligations within the framework established by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sahita (BNSS) 2023 and the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973. This essay will delve
into the definitions, characteristics, implications, and relevant case laws surrounding bailable
and non-bailable offences.
1. Definitions
 Bailable Offences: As per Section 2(1)(c) of the BNSS 2023, bailable offences are
those for which the accused is entitled to bail as a matter of right. These offences are
typically listed in the First Schedule of the BNSS, which provides specific guidance
on what constitutes a bailable offence.
 Non-Bailable Offences: Defined under the same section, non-bailable offences are
those that do not confer a right to bail. The accused must seek bail through a judicial
process, and its grant is not guaranteed.
2. Nature of Offence
 Bailable Offences: Generally, these are considered less serious crimes, such as minor
theft, defamation, and public nuisance. They do not pose a significant threat to
societal safety or public order.
 Non-Bailable Offences: These offences encompass more severe crimes such as
murder, rape, and drug trafficking, reflecting a greater potential harm to individuals
and society as a whole.
Case Law
In Babu Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1978), the Supreme Court reiterated that the primary
objective of bail is to secure the presence of the accused at trial without unduly punishing
individuals before their guilt is established.
3. Punishment
 Bailable Offences: The punishments associated with bailable offences typically
involve a term of imprisonment not exceeding three years or fines, reflecting their less
severe nature.
 Non-Bailable Offences: These offences carry heavier punishments, which may
include life imprisonment or the death penalty, underscoring their serious implications
for victims and society.
Case Law
In Jasbir Singh v. State of Punjab (2004), the Supreme Court clarified that the nature of the
offence directly impacts the bail decision, with non-bailable offences demanding rigorous
scrutiny due to the potential for severe penalties.
4. Right to Bail
 Bailable Offences: The right to bail in bailable offences is enshrined in Section 436
of the CrPC, allowing the accused to secure release upon fulfilling specific conditions.
 Non-Bailable Offences: Here, the right to bail is not automatic. Section 480 of the
BNSS dictates that bail is granted at the discretion of the police or the court,
 contingent upon multiple factors such as the nature of the offence and the character of
the accused.
Case Law
The landmark judgment in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) highlighted that
the decision to grant bail for non-bailable offences should be informed by the principles of
justice and the particular circumstances surrounding the accused.
5. Legal Authority for Granting Bail
 Bailable Offences: Bail can be granted easily by police officers or magistrates
without extensive procedural requirements, emphasizing the straightforward nature of
these cases.
 Non-Bailable Offences: The granting of bail is more complex, requiring judicial
oversight. The court must assess the risk of flight, potential tampering with evidence,
and the seriousness of the charges.
Case Law
In Sanjay Chandra v. CBI (2012), the Supreme Court affirmed that bail must be granted
judiciously, considering the likelihood of the accused fleeing or influencing witnesses,
especially in non-bailable cases.
6. Conditions for Granting Bail
 Bailable Offences: Conditions attached to bail in these cases are generally lenient and
primarily focus on the accused's obligation to appear in court.
 Non-Bailable Offences: Conditions may be stringent and can include restrictions on
contacting witnesses, prohibitions against committing similar offences, and other
stipulations designed to ensure compliance with the law.
7. Process of Granting Bail
 Bailable Offences: The bail process is typically swift, allowing for immediate release
upon meeting necessary requirements. This process is designed to minimize
unnecessary detention before trial.
 Non-Bailable Offences: The process is more involved, requiring court hearings and a
thorough examination of the case before bail can be granted. This is essential for
maintaining public safety and the integrity of the judicial process.
Case Law
In Shri Sukh Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1996), the Supreme Court highlighted the
importance of balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of society when
considering bail for non-bailable offences.
8. Impact on Future Proceedings
 Bailable Offences: The ability to secure bail allows the accused to participate freely
in their trial, ensuring a more equitable judicial process and reducing the stigma of
pre-trial detention.
 Non-Bailable Offences: Failing to adhere to bail conditions can lead to re-arrest and
harsher penalties. Non-compliance not only impacts the accused but also affects the
administration of justice.
9. Anticipatory Bail
Anticipatory bail, governed by Section 482 of the BNSS, allows individuals to seek bail
before an arrest is made. This provision is crucial for protecting individuals who may be
wrongfully accused of non-bailable offences. Conditions typically imposed include
requirements to attend all police interrogations and refrain from influencing witnesses.
Case Law
In Adri Dharam Das v. State of West Bengal (2005), the Supreme Court affirmed that
anticipatory bail protects individuals from wrongful detention and allows for a more balanced
approach to pre-trial proceedings.
Conclusion
The differentiation between bailable and non-bailable offences is fundamental to the Indian
legal system, shaping the rights of the accused and influencing judicial proceedings. Bailable
offences facilitate easier access to justice, while non-bailable offences require careful judicial
consideration to protect society from serious threats. Understanding these distinctions is
critical for navigating the complexities of criminal law in India, emphasizing the balance
between individual rights and public safety. As the judicial landscape evolves, ongoing legal
interpretations and precedents will continue to refine this essential aspect of criminal justice.

ii. Cognizable and non-cognizable offence

Introduction
The classification of offences into cognizable and non-cognizable categories under the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sahita (BNSS) 2023 is crucial for understanding the powers of
law enforcement and the procedural rights of individuals. This framework is essential for the
effective administration of justice, delineating how different types of offences are handled by
the police and the judiciary. This essay will provide an in-depth analysis of these
classifications, supported by relevant sections of the BNSS and landmark case laws.
1. Definitions
 Cognizable Offences: Defined under Section 2(1)(b) of the BNSS 2023, cognizable
offences are those punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a
term exceeding three years. This definition underscores the serious nature of these
crimes, requiring immediate police intervention.
 Non-Cognizable Offences: According to Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, non-
cognizable offences are those punishable with imprisonment for less than three years
or with a fine only. These offences are considered less serious, necessitating judicial
oversight prior to police action.
2. Nature of Offences
 Cognizable Offences: Examples include murder (IPC Section 302), rape (IPC
Section 375), and dowry death (IPC Section 304B). The severity of these crimes
necessitates urgent police action to protect public safety.
 Non-Cognizable Offences: Examples include assault (IPC Section 351), cheating
(IPC Section 415), and defamation (IPC Section 499). These offences are treated with
more caution, emphasizing the need for court intervention before police action.
Case Law
In Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P. (2013), the Supreme Court held that a police officer is
bound to register an FIR upon receiving information about a cognizable offence. This ruling
reinforced the obligation of law enforcement to act promptly in serious cases.
3. Police Powers
 Cognizable Offences: Section 156 of the BNSS empowers police to arrest without a
warrant and initiate investigations immediately upon receiving an FIR. This authority
allows for swift action to apprehend suspects and gather crucial evidence.
 Non-Cognizable Offences: As per Section 155 of the BNSS, police cannot arrest
without a warrant or initiate an investigation without the magistrate's permission. This
limitation emphasizes the necessity for judicial oversight in less serious matters.
Case Law
In Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2007), the Supreme Court ruled that if a police officer refuses
to register an FIR for a cognizable offence, the aggrieved party can approach a magistrate to
ensure proper investigation, highlighting the importance of accountability in police actions.
4. Procedure for Investigation
Cognizable Offences
 Filing an FIR: The process begins with the registration of an FIR under Section 154
of the BNSS. A copy is provided to the complainant, and the FIR is forwarded to the
magistrate.
 Investigation Process: The officer-in-charge assigns personnel to the case. They may
conduct searches, seize evidence, and interrogate witnesses immediately.
 Detention and Production: The accused must be presented before a magistrate
within 24 hours of arrest, as mandated by Section 57 of the BNSS. If further detention
is required, the police must seek the magistrate's permission.
Non-Cognizable Offences
 Initial Steps: Under Section 155, upon receiving information about a non-cognizable
offence, the police must record the complaint and refer the informant to the
magistrate.
 Permission Requirement: The police can only begin an investigation after obtaining
a magistrate's order, as specified in Section 155(2). This judicial requirement
emphasizes the need for oversight in less serious cases.
5. Treatment of Mixed Offences
According to Section 155(4) of the BNSS, if a case involves both cognizable and non-
cognizable offences, the entire case is treated as cognizable. This provision allows law
enforcement to exercise their full investigative powers for efficiency and public safety.
6. Key Differences
Basis Cognizable Offences Non-Cognizable Offences
Arrest without a warrant; immediate No arrest without a warrant;
Meaning
investigation permission required
Court Required for investigation to
Not required for investigation
Permission commence
Severity of
Serious offences Less serious offences
Crime
Murder (IPC Sec. 302), theft (IPC Assault (IPC Sec. 351), cheating (IPC
Examples
Sec. 378), kidnapping (IPC Sec. 363) Sec. 415), defamation (IPC Sec. 499)
Statutory
Section 2(1)(b) of the BNSS 2023 Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS 2023
Definition
7. Important Case Laws
1. Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P. (2013): Established the obligation of police to
register FIRs for cognizable offences and emphasized immediate action to ensure
victim protection.
2. Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2007): Clarified that if a police officer refuses to
register an FIR for a cognizable offence, the aggrieved party can approach a
magistrate for redress.
3. Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006): This landmark ruling emphasized the need
for police reforms, reiterating that non-registration of FIRs in cognizable cases is an
abuse of power, thus protecting the rights of individuals.
8. Conclusion
The BNSS 2023 provides a clear framework for the classification of cognizable and non-
cognizable offences, which is crucial for the administration of justice. Cognizable offences
require swift police action to ensure public safety, while non-cognizable offences emphasize
judicial oversight to protect individual rights. Understanding these distinctions is vital for law
enforcement, legal practitioners, and the public, ensuring that justice is both effective and
equitable. The ongoing evolution of case law will continue to shape the interpretation and
application of these provisions, reflecting the dynamic nature of the legal landscape.

Question
what do you mean by FIR? How can FIR be registered if the police officer refuses to
register it?
discuss its evidentiary value and the effect of delay in lodging a FIR.
Introduction
The First Information Report (FIR) is a crucial document within the Indian criminal justice
system, representing the initial formal complaint about a cognizable offence. While the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sahita (BNSS) 2023 does not explicitly define FIR, it lays out
significant provisions that govern its registration and implications. This essay delves into the
meaning of FIR, the registration process as per the BNSS, relevant sections, challenges
encountered in its implementation, evidentiary value, and the consequences of delays in
filing, while referencing pertinent case laws to provide a comprehensive overview.
Meaning of FIR
The term First Information Report (FIR) refers to the first report made to the police
regarding the commission of a cognizable offence. Although the BNSS 2023 does not offer a
formal definition, the following points elucidate its meaning:
 Initial Report: An FIR is the first communication that triggers police action in
response to a reported crime.
 Content: It typically includes vital information such as the date, time, and location of
the offence, a description of the incident, details of the accused, and any witness
information.
 Initiation of Investigation: The FIR serves as the foundation for further
investigation, documenting the informant's statement and any initial evidence.
 Provided by the Victim or Informant: It can be lodged by the victim of the crime or
someone acting on their behalf, signifying their intent to seek justice.
The lack of a formal definition in the BNSS has led to varying interpretations among law
enforcement agencies and the judiciary, which can affect individuals’ rights and the
investigative process. Nonetheless, provisions within the BNSS emphasize the importance of
FIRs as vital legal documents.
Purpose and Significance of FIR
The FIR plays several critical roles in the criminal justice process:
1. Initiation of Investigation: It is the primary document that initiates police
investigations, setting in motion the machinery of justice.
2. Formal Record: An FIR provides a formal record of the complaint, which is essential
for both police investigations and subsequent legal proceedings.
3. Protection of Rights: By mandating the registration of FIRs, the law protects the
rights of victims, ensuring that their complaints are heard and addressed.
Provisions of FIR Registration under BNSS 2023
Section 173 Overview
Section 173 of the BNSS 2023 lays out the procedures governing the registration and
handling of FIRs. This section includes several critical sub-sections that elaborate on the FIR
registration process:
Sub-section 1: General Provisions
This sub-section establishes that any report regarding the occurrence of a cognizable offence
must be communicated to the officer in charge of the police station. Key aspects include:
 If the information is provided orally, it must be documented in writing and signed by
the informant after being read back to them to ensure accuracy.
 If the report is made electronically, the informant must provide a signature within
three days to validate the FIR.
Sub-section 2: Copy of FIR
This provision mandates that a copy of the FIR must be given to the informant or victim free
of charge. This requirement enhances transparency and ensures that complainants are
informed of the status of their cases, fostering accountability in police operations.
Sub-section 3: Preliminary Inquiry
A notable innovation under this section is the introduction of a preliminary inquiry for
cognizable offences with potential punishment between three to seven years. This inquiry
serves to:
 Determine whether there is sufficient grounds to proceed with a full investigation.
 Allow senior police officers to filter out frivolous or false complaints, ensuring that
only credible allegations lead to formal investigations.
Sub-section 4: Actions on Refusal
If an FIR is not registered despite credible information, the informant can approach the
Superintendent of Police (SP). This sub-section allows the SP to:
 Investigate the matter personally or delegate the task to a subordinate officer, thereby
safeguarding against police inaction and ensuring that valid complaints are addressed.
Sub-section 5: Zero FIR
The BNSS also introduces the concept of Zero FIR, which can be registered at any police
station irrespective of jurisdiction. This provision ensures that:
 Victims can report crimes without delay, especially in urgent situations where
immediate action is critical.
 The process is streamlined, allowing for a quicker response from law enforcement.
Sub-section 6: Electronic FIR
This sub-section facilitates the registration of FIRs through electronic means (e-FIR),
enhancing accessibility and efficiency. It requires that the informant's signature be obtained
within three days, promoting a swift process in lodging complaints.
Evidentiary Value of FIR
The FIR is not merely an administrative document; it holds significant evidentiary weight in
judicial proceedings. Its importance is highlighted through various judicial interpretations:
 The Supreme Court, in Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014),
ruled that FIRs must be registered compulsorily for cognizable offences, reinforcing
the need for prompt action by law enforcement to protect victims' rights.
 In Manoj Kumar Sharma vs. The State of Chhattisgarh (2016), the court
reiterated that FIRs are pivotal in the criminal justice system, emphasizing that police
 must act promptly and impartially when credible information about a cognizable
offence is presented.
These rulings underscore the FIR's role in facilitating justice and maintaining the integrity of
the investigation process.
Effect of Delay in Lodging an FIR
Delays in filing an FIR can have serious implications for the investigative process and the
pursuit of justice:
Impact on Investigation
 Loss of Evidence: Delays can lead to the loss or tampering of critical evidence, which
may hinder the investigation.
 Witness Availability: The reliability of witness testimonies diminishes over time, and
key witnesses may become unavailable.
Legal Credibility
 Doubt on Authenticity: Prolonged delays in filing an FIR can lead to skepticism
regarding the legitimacy of the complaint, potentially affecting the prosecution's case.
Judicial Insights
In Mohammed Ibrahim vs. State of Bihar (2009), the Supreme Court stated that while
delays should not automatically invalidate an FIR, they can compromise the investigation's
integrity. The court emphasized that the prompt registration of FIRs is essential for
preserving the efficacy of the criminal justice system.
Conclusion
The FIR serves as a foundational element of the Indian criminal justice framework, crucial
for initiating investigations and ensuring accountability. The provisions outlined in the
BNSS, particularly Section 173 and its sub-sections, highlight the need for timely and
sensitive handling of FIRs to protect the rights of victims and uphold justice. Addressing
challenges such as police reluctance to register FIRs and the consequences of delays is
imperative for enhancing public confidence in the justice system. Continuous reforms and
adherence to judicial directives will contribute to a more equitable and effective legal
process.

Question
Discuss the provisions of arrest. When can a police officer arrest without warrant?

Section 35 of the relevant Sanhita lays down the conditions under which a police officer may
arrest a person without a warrant or an order from a Magistrate. These provisions primarily
cover situations involving cognizable offences, the need for proper investigation, or concerns
about tampering with evidence. Below is a structured breakdown of the key provisions:

1. Circumstances Allowing Arrest Without Warrant:

A police officer may arrest a person without a warrant in the following situations:
(a) Cognizable Offence Committed in Presence of Police:
If a person commits a cognizable offence in the presence of a police officer, they may be
arrested immediately.
(b) Reasonable Complaint, Credible Information, or Reasonable Suspicion:
If a reasonable complaint has been made, credible information received, or a reasonable
suspicion exists regarding the commission of a cognizable offence punishable by
imprisonment of up to seven years, the following conditions must be met:
(i) Belief in the Offence:
The police officer should reasonably believe that the person committed the offence.
(ii) Necessity for Arrest: Arrest is necessary to:
 Prevent further offences.
 Ensure proper investigation.
 Prevent evidence tampering.
 Prevent influencing witnesses.
 Ensure court attendance.

(c) Serious Offences Punishable by More Than Seven Years:

A police officer may arrest a person if credible information indicates that the person has
committed a cognizable offence punishable with more than seven years of imprisonment or
even a death sentence.
(d) Proclaimed Offender:
If a person has been proclaimed an offender by any Sanhita or State Government order, they
can be arrested without a warrant.
(e) Suspicion of Stolen Property:
If a person possesses items suspected to be stolen, and there is a reasonable suspicion that
they committed an offence in connection with these items.
(f) Obstruction or Escape from Custody:
A person obstructing a police officer on duty or attempting to escape from lawful custody can
be arrested.
(g) Deserter from Armed Forces:
A person reasonably suspected of deserting from the Armed Forces of the Union may be
arrested.
(h) Offences Committed Outside India:
If a person is reasonably suspected of involvement in an offence outside India that would be
punishable under Indian law, and if they are subject to extradition or detention in India.
(i) Breach of Convict Rules:
If a released convict breaches any rule under sub-section (5) of Section 394.
(j) Requisition from Another Police Officer:
An arrest can be made based on a requisition from another police officer, specifying the
person and the offence.

2. Arrest in Non-Cognizable Offences:

In the case of non-cognizable offences, a police officer may not arrest without a warrant or an
order from a Magistrate (subject to Section 39 provisions).

3. Issuance of Notice Instead of Arrest:

If arrest is not required, the police officer should issue a notice to the person to appear at a
specified place. Compliance with the notice prevents arrest unless further reasons arise.

4. Failure to Comply with Notice:

Non-compliance or failure to identify oneself as required by the notice may lead to arrest for
the offence specified in the notice.

5. Special Conditions for Arrest of Elderly or Infirm Persons:

For offences punishable by less than three years, if the person is above sixty or infirm, prior
approval from a Deputy Superintendent of Police or higher is required for the arrest.

Case laws
1.The Court through Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 put a stop over
police officers arresting the accused unnecessarily, or the Magistrate authorizing
casual/mechanical detention. The Court suggested the authorities to strike a balance between
individual liberty and societal order while exercising powers under Section 41 CrPC when
police may arrest without warrant.
2. Supreme Court in Hema Mishra v. State of U.P., (2014) 4 SCC 453 laid that Section 41(1)
makes it compulsory for the police officer to record reasons of arrest, or even for not
arresting a person in a particular case. The Court further explained that when arrest is not
made under Section 41(1) CrPC, police officer has to compulsorily issue a notice of
appearance under Section 41-A to such accused.

Conclusion:
The provisions for arrest without a warrant under Section 35 are designed to ensure that
police officers have the authority to detain individuals who pose a risk to the investigation,
public safety, or evidence integrity, while also safeguarding the rights of individuals against
unnecessary or arbitrary arrests.
Question
what is ‘summons’? elucidate the procedure for serving of summons.
Summons: Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), a summons is a
formal legal document issued by a court to notify an individual of their obligation to appear
before it. The summons must be in writing, signed by the presiding officer, and bear the
court's seal, ensuring its authenticity. It aims to provide individuals with information about
ongoing legal proceedings involving them, thus upholding the principles of natural justice by
allowing them the opportunity to present their case or testimony. The BNSS outlines various
methods of service, including personal delivery, service on family members, and electronic
communication, to ensure effective notification. Failure to comply with a summons can lead
to legal consequences, emphasizing the importance of this document in the judicial process.
1. Objective of Summons
The main objective of a summons is to ensure that individuals are informed of legal actions
affecting them, allowing them the opportunity to present their case or testimony. This is
fundamental to upholding the principles of natural justice, ensuring that no individual is tried
in their absence without being adequately notified.
2. Form of Summons (Section 63 BNSS)
Provisions:
 Every summons must be in writing and prepared in duplicate, signed by the presiding
officer of the court.
 It must bear the court's seal, which signifies its authenticity.
 The summons can also be sent electronically, utilizing encryption methods, and must
include the court's seal or a digital signature to maintain its integrity and security.
Case Law:
 Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1991 SC 1340: The Supreme Court emphasized
the necessity of formal compliance in the issuance of summons to ensure
accountability and transparency.
3. Method of Service (Section 64 BNSS)
Provisions:
 The preferred method of service is personal delivery of the summons to the
individual.
 If personal service is impractical, the summons can be delivered to a person residing
with the individual, or a copy can be left at the individual’s residence.
 The serving officer must obtain a signature from the recipient on the original
summons as proof of receipt.
Case Law:
 K.K. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1954 SC 197: The court held that proper service
of summons is a prerequisite for the court to assume jurisdiction over a party.
4. Service on Corporate Entities (Section 65 BNSS)
Provisions:
 For corporations, summons should be served to a Director, Manager, Secretary, or any
designated officer.
 In the case of partnerships or associations, service can be made to any partner or sent
via registered post.
Case Law:
  Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011: The court recognized the need for
efficient service on corporate bodies to ensure accountability in legal proceedings.
5. Service When Person Cannot Be Found (Section 66 BNSS)
Provisions:
 If the person cannot be located after reasonable attempts, a copy of the summons may
be left with an adult family member residing with them.
 The adult must sign a receipt, confirming the delivery. Notably, a servant does not
qualify as a family member under this section.
Case Law:
 Kalyan Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal, 2011 (2) CCrLR 60: The court reiterated
that service must be effective and proper to maintain the sanctity of legal proceedings.
6. Alternate Service Procedure (Section 67 BNSS)
Provisions:
 If service cannot be achieved through the previously outlined methods, the serving
officer may affix a copy of the summons to a conspicuous part of the individual’s
residence.
 After making necessary inquiries, the court may determine whether the summons has
been duly served or if further attempts are needed.
Case Law:
 Ramesh v. State of Haryana, 2006 (2) RCR (Criminal) 645: The court allowed
alternative modes of service when the standard methods failed, provided reasonable
steps were taken.
7. Service on Government Servants (Section 68 BNSS)
Provisions:
 Summons directed at government servants must be served through the head of their
office.
 The head is responsible for ensuring proper service according to the protocols
established in Section 64 and must return the summons with necessary endorsements
to the court.
Case Law:
 Union of India v. A.S. Gupta, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 557: The court upheld that service
on government employees should follow hierarchical protocols to maintain order and
accountability.
8. Service Outside Local Limits (Section 69 BNSS)
Provisions:
 When a summons must be served outside the local jurisdiction of the court, it should
be sent to a magistrate within the area where the individual resides, who will then
carry out the service according to BNSS provisions.
Case Law:
 Babu Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 104: The Supreme Court stated
that the jurisdiction of courts must be respected and followed in procedural matters,
including service of summons.
9. Proof of Service (Section 70 BNSS)
Provisions:
 An affidavit made before a magistrate confirming that service has occurred is
admissible if the serving officer cannot be present at the hearing.
  Summons served electronically under the relevant sections are considered duly
served, with a copy attested as proof.
Case Law:
 G. P. Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2004 (2) MPHT 141: The court accepted
affidavits as valid proof of service, reinforcing the adaptability of legal procedures.
10. Service on Witnesses (Section 71 BNSS)
Provisions:
 A court may issue a summons to a witness and simultaneously direct that a copy be
sent via electronic communication or registered post.
 If a postal employee indicates that the witness refused delivery, the court may treat
the summons as duly served.
Case Law:
 State of Maharashtra v. Jagmohan Singh Kalyan Singh Choudhary, 2008 (1) RCR
(Criminal) 574: The court acknowledged that refusal of delivery by a witness does not
invalidate the summons.
Conclusion
The provisions governing the service of summons under the BNSS are meticulously crafted
to uphold the principles of justice and due process. By ensuring individuals are adequately
informed and provided opportunities to participate in legal proceedings, these provisions
contribute to maintaining the integrity of the judicial system. Effective service of summons is
essential not only as a legal formality but as a foundational element of ensuring that justice is
served.

Question
what do you mean by complaint? Distinguish complaint from FIR?
Introduction
In everyday conversation, terms like "complaint" and "FIR" (First Information Report) are
often used interchangeably. However, in criminal jurisprudence, these terms have distinct
meanings and implications. This article aims to clarify the definitions of complaint and FIR,
outline the filing processes for each, and highlight their differences.
Definition of Complaint
A complaint is defined under Section 2(d) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (BNSS). It refers to any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, intending
to prompt action against an individual for having committed an offense. Notably, it excludes
police reports. Additionally, a report made by a police officer following an investigation that
uncovers a non-cognizable offense is treated as a complaint, with the officer acting as the
complainant.
Case Law on Complaints
In P. Kunhumuhammed v. State of Kerala, the High Court held that a police report under
Section 155(2) could be treated as a complaint if it establishes the commission of a non-
cognizable offense, enabling the Magistrate to take appropriate action.
Definition of FIR
A First Information Report (FIR) represents the initial phase in a criminal matter, where
the facts of a crime are reported to the police by an eyewitness, victim, or any individual with
knowledge of the offense. Under Section 173 of the BNSS, the FIR must be recorded in
writing, following specific procedures.
Section 173 of BNSS
Section 173 outlines the requirements and procedures for the registration of FIRs and
subsequent investigations. It mandates that:
 The police must record the information regarding a cognizable offense in a prescribed
format.
 Upon registration, the police are obliged to initiate an investigation without needing
prior approval from a Magistrate.
 The FIR must be signed by the informant and a copy must be provided to them free of
charge.
 After completing the investigation, the police must file a charge sheet, summarizing
the findings and evidence.
This section ensures that serious offenses receive prompt attention and facilitates the swift
initiation of investigations by the police.
Case Law on FIRs
In Hallu v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the court clarified that Section 154 does not limit the
informant to individuals with firsthand knowledge; any information regarding a cognizable
offense suffices for an FIR.
Cognizance of FIR and Complaint
FIR
FIRs can be filed by victims, witnesses, or any individuals aware of the crime. Section 173 of
the BNSS outlines the need for the police to record the FIR and initiate an investigation
immediately.
Complaint
Upon receiving a complaint, a Magistrate may take cognizance of the matter as per Section
210 of the BNSS. The Magistrate examines the allegations, and if found meritorious, may
order an inquiry or direct the police to investigate.
Section 210 of BNSS
Section 210 provides the framework for a Magistrate to take cognizance of a complaint. Key
aspects include:
 The Magistrate examines the complaint upon its submission.
 If the Magistrate finds sufficient grounds, they can order an inquiry or direct the
police to conduct an investigation.
 This section empowers the Magistrate to oversee the initial inquiry and ensure that
appropriate actions are taken if the complaint reveals a prima facie case.
Case Law on Cognizance
In Ravishankar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the court emphasized that a complaint needs
to be evaluated by the Magistrate to determine whether an inquiry is warranted, illustrating
the distinct processes involved for FIRs and complaints.
Key Differences Between Complaint and FIR
Aspect Complaint FIR
Submitted to a police officer at a
Authority Submitted to a Judicial Magistrate
police station
Types of Applicable to both cognizable and Applicable only to cognizable
Offenses non-cognizable offenses offenses
Outcome May lead to an inquiry, not necessarily Must be registered, prompting
 Aspect Complaint FIR
an FIR immediate investigation
Legally binding, serving as the basis
Legal Nature Not legally binding
for investigation
No specific format; can be verbal or
Format Must adhere to a prescribed format
written
Police Police not obligated to investigate Police are mandated to investigate an
Obligation every complaint FIR immediately

Legal Procedures and Case Laws

Filing a Complaint
When a complaint is made to the Magistrate, it may not follow a strict format. The Magistrate
examines the facts and may conduct preliminary inquiries. If the complaint is substantiated,
the case is deemed ready for trial, leading to possible summons or warrants against the
accused.
Filing an FIR
The FIR requires specific information to be recorded by the police. Upon registration, the
police are obligated to investigate the matter promptly. The FIR's formal nature is reinforced
by the procedural requirements outlined in Section 173 of the BNSS.
Important Sections
 Section 173: Details the procedure for registering an FIR and conducting
investigations, ensuring timely police action.
 Section 2(d): Defines a complaint.
 Section 155(2): Addresses how a police report can be treated as a complaint.
 Section 210: Discusses the cognizance of offenses by the Magistrate, empowering
judicial oversight.
Conclusion
In summary, while complaints and FIRs may appear similar, they serve different purposes
within the legal framework. A complaint is a formal allegation made to a Magistrate, whereas
an FIR is a document lodged with the police concerning cognizable offenses. Understanding
these distinctions is vital for navigating the criminal justice system effectively. Complaints
initiate judicial scrutiny, while FIRs trigger police investigations, both essential for
maintaining law and order.

Question
what are the powers of magistrate for taking cognizance of any offence?
Introduction
Under Section 210 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the powers of a
Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence are clearly defined. A Magistrate can initiate
legal proceedings (take cognizance) in relation to any offence under specific circumstances
outlined by the BNSS. The law ensures both fairness and judicial independence while
balancing the rights of the accused and the victim.

Taking cognizance is “sine qua non” for trial. In the case of Smt. Mona Panwar v.
Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad through its Registrar, (2011) 2 Cr.L.J.
1619 (SC), it was established that taking cognizance refers to recognizing an offence, not the
offender. It does not involve formal action but occurs when a Magistrate applies their mind to
the suspected commission of a crime.
1. Grounds for Taking Cognizance
A Magistrate may take cognizance of an offence on the following grounds:
(a) Upon Receiving a Complaint of Facts
A Magistrate can take cognizance when a complaint is received that discloses facts
constituting an offence. The complaint can be filed by the aggrieved party or a person
authorized by law. For example, this could include complaints from a victim, a witness, or an
authorized individual under a special law.
 Section 210(1)(a): The complaint must disclose sufficient facts to establish the
commission of an offence.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Ajay Mehra vs Durgesh Babu (2002) 9 SCC 709, made
it clear that where the statement made in the complaint and statements made under section
202 of CrPC taken on face value made out the offence, taking of cognizance would be
justified. The High Court could not consider other material to quash the cognizance at this
stage.
(b) Upon a Police Report
A police report, commonly known as a charge sheet, can also serve as a basis for a Magistrate
to take cognizance. This includes reports submitted electronically, highlighting facts relating
to the commission of the offence.
 Section 210(1)(b): A Magistrate may take cognizance based on a police report filed
by investigating officers, detailing the offence.
It was held in Union of India vs Prakash P. Hinduja, (2003) Cri. L.J. 3117 (SC), that
when after completion of the investigation of an offence, a final (closer) report is submitted
by the police before the Magistrate under section 173(2) of CrPC, he may not accept the
report and can take cognizance of the offence if he feels that the evidence so collected during
the investigation justifies the prosecution of the accused. He may summon the accused to
exercise powers conferred by section 190 of CrPC.
(c) Upon Information from Any Person or Own Knowledge
In certain cases, a Magistrate may take cognizance of an offence based on information
received from any person other than a police officer or even upon the Magistrate's own
knowledge or observation of the offence.
 Section 210(1)(c): If the Magistrate has knowledge, or receives information from
another reliable source, they are empowered to initiate proceedings without waiting
for a formal complaint or police report.

2. Empowerment of Magistrates by Chief Judicial Magistrate

While a Magistrate of the First Class has the general authority to take cognizance of all
offences, a Magistrate of the Second Class may only take cognizance of certain offences.
However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) has the discretion to empower a Magistrate
of the Second Class to take cognizance of specific offences within their jurisdiction.
 Section 210(2): The Chief Judicial Magistrate can specifically empower a Magistrate
of the Second Class to take cognizance of offences that fall within their competence to
try or inquire into.
3. Transfer of Case
If a Magistrate takes cognizance based on information received under Section 210(1)(c) (own
knowledge or from other persons), the accused has the right to request a transfer of the case.
If any accused person objects to the proceedings, the case shall be transferred to another
Magistrate as specified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
 Section 211: This provision ensures that the accused is informed of their right to
request a transfer of the case, ensuring a fair process.

4. Making Over of Cases to Another Magistrate

Once a Magistrate has taken cognizance of an offence, the Chief Judicial Magistrate can
make over the case to another competent Magistrate for further inquiry or trial. This ensures
that the case is handled by the most suitable Magistrate, based on the nature of the offence.
 Section 212: This allows the CJM to delegate cases to subordinate Magistrates for
further inquiry or trial.

5. Special Provisions for Specific Offences

Certain types of offences, due to their sensitive nature, require special provisions before a
Magistrate can take cognizance. These provisions include:
(a) Offences Involving Public Servants
For offences committed by public servants or judges in the course of their duties, a
Magistrate cannot take cognizance without obtaining prior sanction from the concerned
government authority. This includes offences committed by members of the Armed Forces,
judges, and other government employees.
 Section 218: For offences committed by public servants, judicial officers, or members
of the armed forces, prior sanction from the appropriate authority is required.
(b) Offences Related to Marriage and Defamation
Special provisions are made for offences related to marriage, defamation, and sexual crimes.
In cases of defamation or offences against marriage, the aggrieved party, or in some cases, a
third party (e.g., parents or guardians), may file the complaint.
 Section 219: For marriage-related offences, only the aggrieved person can file a
complaint. If the person is unable to do so due to age, mental incapacity, or other
factors, a guardian or another authorized person may file the complaint.
 Section 222: For defamation offences, the aggrieved person must file a complaint,
with certain exceptions that allow others to file on behalf of vulnerable individuals.
(c) Offences Related to State Security and Criminal Conspiracy
Certain serious offences, such as those related to state security or criminal conspiracy, require
prior government sanction before a Magistrate can take cognizance. This ensures that
politically sensitive or security-related cases are closely scrutinized before being heard by the
courts.
 Section 217: For offences related to state security, the prior sanction of the Central or
State Government is necessary.

Limitations on the Powers of a Magistrate

While the powers of a Magistrate under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are extensive,
there are several important limitations designed to protect individual rights and ensure due
process:
1. Necessity of Prior Sanction for Certain Offences
A Magistrate cannot take cognizance of specific offences without obtaining prior sanction
from the relevant authorities. This includes:
 Offences committed by public servants (Section 218), Judges, and Armed Forces:
In such cases, the Magistrate must obtain sanction from the relevant government or
authority before proceeding.
 Offences related to state security or criminal conspiracy: For sensitive political
and national security-related offences, prior sanction from the Central or State
Government is necessary (Section 217).
2. Limited Jurisdiction for Magistrates of the Second Class
A Magistrate of the Second Class has limited powers and may only take cognizance of
certain offences. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate can empower a Second Class
Magistrate to take cognizance of offences within their competence.
 Section 210(2): The jurisdiction of a Second Class Magistrate is constrained unless
specially authorized by the CJM.
3. Protection for Vulnerable Complainants
In cases involving children, persons of unsound mind, or those unable to physically appear
due to illness, the complaint may be filed by a guardian or other authorized person.
However, the Court’s permission is required in certain cases.
 Section 219: This ensures that vulnerable individuals are not compelled to appear in
court, but it limits who can file complaints on their behalf.
4. Restrictions on Public Servants and Government Sanctioned Cases
For offences involving public servants or government employees, the sanction process adds a
procedural barrier. This ensures that politically sensitive or state-related cases are properly
vetted before proceeding, preventing frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions.
 Section 218: Prior government sanction is required, which can delay the process and
limit the Magistrate’s discretion to initiate proceedings immediately.
Jailok Thakur vs the State of Bihar, AIR 1980 Pat 126 (FB): In this case, the court said
that even after the period of limitation, such offences can be taken cognizance of by the court
if the delay is condoned before taking cognizance.

S.M. Vikas vs A.M. Chopra, (1978) 2 SCC 403: The Court can condone the delay even
without a proper explanation in the interest of justice.

Arun Vyas vs Anita Vyas, (1999) 4 SCC 690: The court held that the delay should not be
condoned without notice to the accused and without recording any reasons for it.

Conclusion
The powers of a Magistrate under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are designed to
ensure a fair and just criminal process. While Magistrates have broad authority to take
cognizance of offences, these powers are subject to certain limitations. These include
requirements for prior sanction in cases involving public servants, armed forces, and offences
related to state security. Additionally, the jurisdiction of Magistrates of the Second Class is
limited unless specially empowered. There are also provisions to protect vulnerable
complainants and ensure that sensitive cases involving public servants or government
officials are thoroughly vetted.
By balancing these powers and limitations, the BNSS ensures that the criminal justice system
is both effective and fair, safeguarding the rights of the accused while providing a remedy for
victims.
Question
discuss the procedure adopted by the magistrate in ensuring security and keeping peace
under bnss.

Question
The purpose of 163 cpc is not to restrict the liberty of citizens but to avert the danger of
breach of peace, prove the above statement with the help of case laws.
Question
Discuss the law for maintenance in the light of the landmark case laws.
Question
what are the rights of an arrested person? discuss with the help of landmark case law.

In India, even individuals accused of criminal offenses are entitled to fundamental rights
under the Indian Constitution and international conventions like the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. These rights are designed to prevent the misuse of governmental power
during arrests and detention, ensuring justice, equity, and good conscience. The rights of an
arrested person are provided under the Indian Constitution, the Code of Criminal Procedure
(CrPC), and numerous landmark judgments by Indian courts.
1. Right to Know the Grounds of Arrest
Section 47 of bnss mandates that an arrested person must be informed immediately of the
grounds of arrest and whether the offense is bailable or non-bailable.
Section 48 of bnss requires police to inform a friend or relative of the arrested person about
the arrest.
Case Law: In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), the Supreme Court emphasized that
arbitrary arrests are illegal, and authorities must balance individual liberty with societal order.
Article 20(1) of the Constitution supports this right, making it mandatory to inform the
accused of the grounds of arrest.

2. Right to Be Taken Before a Magistrate Without Delay

Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution and Section 58 of bnss state that every arrested
person must be presented before a Magistrate within 24 hours, excluding travel time.
Section 78 of bnss reiterates this for arrests made with a warrant.
Case Law: In Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, the Court held that
speedy trials and timely judicial review are integral to justice.
3. Right to Be Released on Bail
Under Section 47 of bnss, if the offense is bailable, the accused has the right to be released on
bail.
In non-bailable offenses, bail is granted at the court's discretion.
The right to bail aligns with the principle of "innocent until proven guilty."

4. Right to a Fair Trial

Although not explicitly stated in the CrPC, Article 14 of the Indian Constitution guarantees
equality before the law, implying a fair trial.
Case Law: In Hussainara Khatoon, the Court asserted the importance of a speedy trial,
ensuring justice for the accused.

5. Right to Consult a Legal Practitioner

Article 22(1) of the Constitution grants the right to consult a legal practitioner as soon as a
person is detained.
Section 340 of bnss provides that the accused has the right to be defended by a lawyer of
choice.
Case Law: In Khatri v. State of Bihar, the Court highlighted the need for free legal aid for
those unable to afford it.

6. Right to Free Legal Aid

Under Section 341 of bnss and Article 39A, the state must provide free legal aid if an accused
cannot afford legal representation.
Case Law: Khatri v. State of Bihar reiterated that free legal aid is a fundamental right for
indigent accused.

7. Right to Remain Silent

This right originates from common law principles and Article 20(3) of the Constitution,
protecting against self-incrimination.
Case Law: In Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani, the Court held that no one could force the
accused to answer or self-incriminate during interrogation.

8. Right to Be Examined by a Medical Practitioner

Section 53 of bnss provides that an arrested person has the right to a medical examination
upon request, ensuring that any evidence of injury or mistreatment is documented.
Case Law: In Yoginder Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court recognized the
importance of medical examination to protect detainees’ rights and uphold Article 21.

9. Right to Inform Friends or Relatives

In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court issued guidelines for police
officers, including the duty to inform friends or family about the arrest.
This case set a precedent for police accountability in arrests, promoting transparency and
protecting the accused from abuse.

Conclusion
The rights of an arrested person protect individual liberty and uphold the principle of justice,
equity, and good conscience. As highlighted in cases like Arnesh Kumar, Khatri, and D.K.
Basu, these rights limit the misuse of governmental powers and ensure that due process is
followed in arrests and detention, honoring India’s constitutional commitment to human
rights and justice.
Question
short notes on:-
i. arrest by magistrate
ii. derectoriate of prosecution
question
constitution and classes of courts under bnss. Also elaborate upon the jurisdiction.

Introduction
The Indian judicial system is designed to cater to the needs of its citizens, providing a
structured and accessible avenue for justice. Chapter III of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 outlines provisions for the powers and structure of courts. This system
ensures that any person can approach the courts with relative ease, supporting the Indian
judiciary’s reputation for efficiency. Sections 21 to 29 of BNSS cover the powers vested in
various levels of courts, and Section 6 specifically details the types of courts established
within the system.

Types and Classes of Courts in India

According to Section 6 of the BNSS, aside from High Courts and other courts established
under various laws, each state must have specific classes of criminal courts, including:
1. Courts of Session
2. Judicial Magistrates of the First Class
3. Judicial Magistrates of the Second Class
4. Executive Magistrates
These courts are organized hierarchically to handle different levels of cases, thus ensuring a
streamlined process for addressing legal matters.
Hierarchy of Courts
The BNSS establishes a clear hierarchy to manage the jurisdiction and authority of various
courts, divided into three main levels:

1. Lower-Level Courts
Courts of Judicial Magistrate (Section 9): The BNSS mandates that each district have courts
of Judicial Magistrates of the First and Second Class, which the state government establishes
in consultation with the High Court. Special courts may be set up for particular cases as
necessary, and presiding officers are appointed by the High Court.

Chief Judicial Magistrate (Section 10): Every district has a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM),
appointed by the High Court, who holds supervisory control over other magistrates.
Additional CJMs can be appointed to share this authority.

Special Judicial Magistrate (Section 11): The High Court can appoint Special Judicial
Magistrates, often individuals with government experience, to handle particular cases or
classes of cases.

Subordination of Judicial Magistrates (Section 13): Judicial Magistrates are subordinate to

the Sessions Judge, with the Chief Judicial Magistrate holding authority over subordinate
magistrates and distributing cases among them.

2. Middle-Level Courts
Court of Sessions (Section 8): The State Government establishes Courts of Sessions for each
division, presided over by a Sessions Judge appointed by the High Court. Additional Sessions
Judges may be appointed to assist, and provisions are made for transferring cases across
divisions or appointing substitute judges in case of vacancies.

Concepts Removed: Notably, the BNSS removes the roles of Assistant Sessions Judge and
Metropolitan Magistrate, previously established under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

3. Higher-Level Courts
High Courts: Under Article 214 of the Constitution of India, each state must have a High
Court, which oversees the subordinate courts and has jurisdiction to handle appeals and
specific types of cases as outlined in the BNSS.
Supreme Court of India: The Supreme Court, established under Article 124 of the
Constitution, is the apex court of the country, with the power to hear appeals from High
Courts and other special jurisdiction cases.

Jurisdiction and Power of Courts

The BNSS, through Sections 21-29, delineates the powers and jurisdiction of various courts:

Section 21: Courts authorized to try offences include the High Court, Sessions Courts, and
other designated courts as per the First Schedule. Certain offenses under the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS) 2023, including those under Sections 64 to 71, should ideally be tried in courts
presided over by a woman.

Section 22 & Section 23: These sections define the sentencing powers of High Courts,
Sessions Judges, and Magistrates. For instance, a Sessions Judge can impose any sentence as
per law but must seek High Court confirmation for a death sentence. Chief Judicial
Magistrates may impose sentences up to seven years of imprisonment but not death or life
imprisonment.

Section 24: This section empowers Magistrates to impose imprisonment in default of fine,
within certain limitations.

Section 25: Courts can impose sentences for multiple offenses in one trial, allowing for either
concurrent or consecutive sentences, but with limits on the total duration of consecutive
sentences (not exceeding twice the maximum punishment for a single offense).

Section 26-29: These sections outline the procedures for conferring, withdrawing, and
delegating judicial powers and responsibilities, including those exercised by successors-in-
office.

Executive Magistrates (Section 14-15)

In addition to Judicial Magistrates, BNSS provisions allow for Executive Magistrates in each
district:
Executive Magistrates: Appointed by the State Government, they handle administrative and
certain judicial functions.
Special Executive Magistrates: Appointed for specific areas or functions, they may include
police officers of Superintendent rank or higher.
Conclusion
The judiciary in India is structured to ensure access to justice, with a clear jurisdictional
division and powers defined at each level. This systematic organization prevents any member
from overstepping their jurisdiction, ensuring fairness and order. The BNSS reinforces these
principles, creating a comprehensive legal framework that enables citizens to uphold their
rights and seek redress against injustices.

Question
differentiate the following:-
ii. Inquiry and investigation

1. Definition and Purpose:

 Investigation is the process of gathering facts, evidence, and information to solve a
crime or clarify a legal matter. The goal is to determine whether a crime has occurred,
identify the parties involved, and collect sufficient evidence to decide whether charges
should be filed. It is typically initiated when a complaint or First Information Report
(FIR) is filed.
 Inquiry, on the other hand, is a formal judicial process designed to resolve
uncertainty, establish the truth, or expand knowledge regarding a particular case or
event. It is initiated after the police investigation is completed and is usually
conducted by a magistrate or court. The primary aim of an inquiry is to evaluate the
collected evidence, hear witness testimony, and determine whether the allegations are
true or false.
2. Legal Framework:
Both investigation and inquiry are defined under the bnss:
 Investigation is defined in Section 2(l) of the bnss. It refers to all proceedings carried
out by the police to collect evidence related to a crime.
 Inquiry is defined in Section 2(k) of the bnss. It refers to the legal process intended
to clear doubts, ascertain the truth, or further understanding regarding a case.
3. Key Features:
 Investigation:
o Conducted by police officers or authorized law enforcement agents.
o Focuses on systematically gathering evidence and facts.
o Occurs at the initial stage of a criminal case after an FIR or complaint is filed.
o The goal is to establish whether a crime has occurred and identify the
offenders.
o It ends with the filing of a police report or charge sheet.
  Inquiry:
o Conducted by a magistrate or court.
o Takes place after the police have concluded their investigation and filed a
charge sheet.
o The goal is to examine the evidence and witness statements to determine the
truth of the allegations.
o Witnesses testify under oath during the inquiry process.
o It can lead to the framing of formal charges if enough evidence is found.
4. Stage in the Legal Process:
 Investigation is the first stage in a criminal case, triggered by the filing of an FIR or
complaint. It involves gathering evidence to assess whether there is enough basis for a
case to proceed.
 Inquiry is the second stage and occurs after the investigation. It is a judicial process,
aimed at scrutinizing the evidence and establishing whether there is sufficient cause to
charge the accused.
5. Commencement and Conclusion:
 An investigation begins when an FIR is filed, and it concludes when the police
submit a report, often recommending whether charges should be brought.
 An inquiry begins when the police submit a charge sheet based on their investigation,
and it concludes with the framing of charges by the magistrate or court.
6. Nature of Process:
 Investigation is an administrative process managed by law enforcement authorities,
such as the police, under the bnss.
 Inquiry is a judicial or quasi-judicial process conducted by a magistrate or court,
with a more formal, legal framework and authority.

Conclusion:
In summary, investigation and inquiry are both critical elements of the legal process but
differ in their objectives, procedures, and roles in a criminal case. Investigation is focused on
gathering evidence to solve a crime and is typically carried out by law enforcement. Inquiry,
however, is a formal, judicial process overseen by a magistrate or court, aimed at assessing
the truth of the allegations based on the evidence presented. Understanding the distinction
between these two processes is vital for ensuring that justice is served efficiently and fairly.
Question
discuss the power of police officers in investigating the congnizable offences. Also shed
light on the respective procedure as prescribed under BNSS.
Introduction
The Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) is a legal framework designed to ensure
the security of Indian citizens and provide guidelines for law enforcement, especially in the
investigation of cognizable offences. Cognizable offences, being those in which police have
the authority to arrest without a warrant and initiate investigations without prior approval
from a Magistrate, play a critical role in the functioning of the criminal justice system. The
BNSS lays down clear provisions regarding police powers and procedures for investigating
such offences, from the initial report to the final investigation stages. Sections 175 to 196 of
the BNSS specifically address these powers and procedural requirements.

1. Police Powers to Investigate Cognizable Offences (Section 175)

 Section 175(1): An officer in charge of a police station is authorized to investigate
any cognizable offence within their jurisdiction. Importantly, this authority does not
require prior permission from a Magistrate. The officer can begin an investigation
based solely on the information received about the offence.
 Superintendent’s Role: If the offence is deemed serious or of significant gravity, the
Superintendent of Police (SP) has the discretion to either investigate the case
themselves or assign it to the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP). This
delegation ensures that investigations of high-profile or complex cases are handled by
more senior officers.
 Section 175(2): The actions taken by the investigating officer cannot be questioned on
the grounds of their authority to investigate the case. This provision ensures that the
investigation is not hampered by legal challenges regarding jurisdiction or the
officer's competence.
 Magisterial Oversight (Section 175(3)): A Judicial Magistrate can, upon reviewing
an application made by the police under Section 173(4), order further investigations.
This gives the judiciary a supervisory role over police investigations, ensuring
transparency and accountability.
 Complaints Against Public Servants (Section 175(4)): If a complaint arises against
a public servant during the performance of their official duties, the Judicial
Magistrate can take cognizance of the matter, but only after receiving a report from
the superior officer of the public servant and reviewing the statements made by the
accused public servant.
2. Investigation Procedure (Section 176)
 Section 176(1): If an officer in charge of a police station suspects that a cognizable
offence has been committed, they must immediately inform a Magistrate and
commence the investigation. The officer can either go to the crime scene themselves
or delegate the task to a subordinate officer of appropriate rank. This ensures prompt
action on the report.
 Delegation of Investigation: In cases where the offence is not considered serious or
urgent, the officer in charge may delegate the investigation to a subordinate officer.
However, in more severe cases, the officer in charge is expected to investigate
personally or provide significant oversight.
 Exception for Minor Cases: In cases where the information pertains to a minor or
less serious offence, such as where a person’s name is mentioned, the officer in
charge may choose not to visit the crime scene personally or delegate the
investigation. This reduces unnecessary strain on resources while focusing on more
serious cases.
 Section 176(2): If the officer decides not to investigate a case because there is
insufficient ground to proceed, they must provide a justification for their decision in
writing. This ensures accountability. The officer must also submit regular reports to
the Magistrate, including a fortnightly diary, explaining why no investigation was
initiated.
 Special Provisions for Rape and Sensitive Cases: For cases like rape, the BNSS
mandates that the victim's statement be recorded at a location of their choice (such as
their residence or a social worker’s office), ensuring the victim’s privacy and comfort.
Additionally, where feasible, a female police officer should record the statement, and
the victim should be accompanied by a guardian or social worker. Furthermore, the
statement can be recorded via audio-visual technology to prevent manipulation.
 Forensic Evidence: Section 176(3) requires the collection of forensic evidence when
the offence is punishable by seven years or more. The officer in charge must ensure
that forensic experts visit the crime scene and collect evidence, and the entire process
must be documented through videography (using mobile phones or other electronic
devices). This provision ensures that the physical evidence is preserved in a reliable
manner.

3. Reporting and Supervision of Investigation (Section 177)

 Section 177(1): Every report submitted to a Magistrate must be forwarded through a
superior officer if directed by the State Government. This adds an additional layer
of oversight to ensure that the investigation is proceeding in accordance with legal
norms and is being supervised appropriately.
 Section 177(2): The superior officer is authorized to issue instructions to the officer in
charge of the investigation. These instructions must be recorded in the report, and the
report must be transmitted to the Magistrate without delay. This ensures timely
communication and prevents unnecessary delays in the investigative process.

4. Other Procedural Provisions (Sections 178–196)

 Sections 178-182: These sections lay down procedures for recording statements from
witnesses, obtaining expert opinions, and other formalities necessary during an
investigation. They emphasize the importance of adhering to legal procedures while
 gathering evidence, especially in complex cases where expert testimony or technical
analysis is required.
 Sections 183-186: These sections apply to cases involving official duties or
government officials. Special procedures are in place to ensure that investigations
involving public servants are handled with caution and respect for confidentiality.
 Sections 190-196: These sections outline the procedures for filing charge sheets,
taking cognizance of police reports, and initiating trials based on the findings of an
investigation. A Magistrate can take cognizance of an offence once the police have
filed their report or charge sheet, initiating formal legal proceedings.

Conclusion
The Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) provides a detailed and robust framework
for police officers in India to investigate cognizable offences. It grants police officers broad
powers to investigate such cases without prior judicial approval while ensuring necessary
checks and balances, such as judicial oversight, reporting requirements, and delegation of
duties to senior officers for serious cases. The BNSS also emphasizes the protection of
victims, especially in sensitive cases such as rape, by setting procedures for recording
statements and ensuring privacy and dignity. Additionally, the inclusion of forensic evidence
collection and the use of video documentation ensures that the integrity of the investigative
process is maintained. By balancing the powers of the police with judicial and administrative
supervision, the BNSS ensures that investigations are fair, thorough, and legally sound.

Question
discuss the provisions of attachment of property to compel appearance in the court.
Question
discuss various statutory provisions related to ‘arrest’ under various statutes.
Question
when can a court issue warrant to compel appearance?
Question
discuss the law relating to bail under bnss. What is the basis for bail in the non bailable
cases? When can a bail be cancelled?

Question
explain the post- arrest procedure to be followed by the police.

ś
Question
explain the procedure when the investigation could not be completed within 24 hrs.

Question