Introduction
The criminal justice system begins when a Magistrate takes cognizance of an offence — a vital procedural step that marks the beginning of judicial proceedings. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) outlines the circumstances, procedures, and conditions under which a Magistrate takes cognizance of offences under Sections 190 to 199. At the same time, to preserve the validity of proceedings, the CrPC also deals with irregularities in procedure under Sections 460 to 466, classifying them into curable and incurable irregularities.
This essay explains how Magistrates take cognizance of offences, the legal provisions guiding them, and the concept of irregular proceedings, backed by statutory references and relevant case law.
Meaning of Cognizance
The term “cognizance” is not defined in the CrPC but is judicially understood to mean “judicial notice of an offence” by a Magistrate or Judge.
As per R.R. Chari v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1951 SC 207):
“Taking cognizance does not involve any formal action, but it means that the Magistrate applies his mind to the suspected commission of an offence.”
Statutory Provisions for Taking Cognizance (Sections 190 to 199)
Section 190 – Cognizance of Offences by Magistrates
A Magistrate may take cognizance of any offence in the following ways:
- Upon receiving a complaint of facts constituting such offence
- Upon a police report under Section 173(2)
- Upon information from any person other than a police officer, or on the Magistrate’s own knowledge
Only Magistrates of the First Class or Second Class (if empowered) can take cognizance under this section.
Section 191 – Transfer on Accused’s Request
If a Magistrate has taken cognizance on his own knowledge or information, the accused has a right to transfer the case to another Magistrate.
Section 192 – Transfer by Magistrate
A Magistrate who has taken cognizance may transfer the case to another Magistrate subordinate to him for inquiry or trial.
Section 193 – Cognizance by Courts of Session
Courts of Session cannot take cognizance directly. They can do so only upon committal by a Magistrate under Section 209 CrPC.
Section 195 – Prosecution for Certain Offences Only on Complaint
For specific offences like perjury, fabricating evidence, or contempt of lawful authority, cognizance can only be taken on a written complaint by the public servant or court concerned.
Section 197 – Sanction for Prosecution of Public Servants
A Magistrate cannot take cognizance of offences committed by a public servant while acting in official duty, without prior sanction from the competent government authority.
Important Judicial Interpretation
Gopal Das Sindhi v. State of Assam (AIR 1961 SC 986)
Held that cognizance is taken of the offence, not the offender. A Magistrate may proceed against a person even if not named in the FIR, provided the evidence supports it.
Kishun Singh v. State of Bihar (AIR 1993 SC 329)
A Magistrate taking cognizance upon a police report can summon additional accused not sent for trial by the police, based on available materials.
Irregular Proceedings under CrPC (Sections 460 to 466)
What Are Irregular Proceedings?
Irregular proceedings refer to procedural mistakes committed during judicial acts, which may or may not invalidate the proceedings. The CrPC classifies them as:
- Curable Irregularities: Do not vitiate the proceedings (Section 460)
- Incurable Irregularities: Render the proceeding void (Section 461)
Curable Irregularities (Section 460)
If a Magistrate, not empowered to do any of the following, erroneously does them, the act does not invalidate the proceeding if done in good faith:
- Issues search warrant
- Takes cognizance of an offence
- Tries an offence summarily
- Makes an order under Section 117 (preventive measures)
Such acts are not illegal, but are considered technical irregularities.
Incurable Irregularities (Section 461)
These include actions where lack of jurisdiction or power renders the act illegal and void:
- Trying a case or passing a sentence without authority
- Attaching and selling property without legal sanction
- Holding in-camera trials without proper grounds
- Misuse of provisions for maintenance or custody
These vitiate the proceedings entirely and cannot be cured even with consent or waiver.
Other Safeguards (Sections 462–466)
- Section 462: Trial not invalid due to error in local jurisdiction unless it caused failure of justice
- Section 463: Admission of confessions not vitiated by procedural defect if voluntariness is proven
- Section 464: Absence or error in framing of charge will not invalidate trial unless it caused prejudice
- Section 465: No finding or sentence shall be reversed for procedural errors unless failure of justice is proven
- Section 466: Defects in form do not vitiate summons, warrants, or other documents
Comparative Table of Irregularities
| Section | Type | Nature | Effect on Trial |
|---|---|---|---|
| 460 | Curable irregularities | Magistrate acts without power in good faith | Does not invalidate proceedings |
| 461 | Incurable irregularities | Magistrate acts beyond jurisdiction | Proceedings are void |
| 462–466 | Procedural irregularities | Minor errors in jurisdiction or form | Valid unless prejudice is caused |
Summary Table: Cognizance Provisions
| Section | Provision |
|---|---|
| 190 | Magistrate takes cognizance |
| 191 | Accused may seek transfer |
| 192 | Magistrate may transfer to subordinate court |
| 193 | Sessions Court takes cognizance on committal |
| 195 | Special offences require complaint |
| 197 | Sanction required for public servant offences |