Skip to main content

Cognizable and non-cognizable offence

 Cognizable and non-cognizable offences


There are many offences that are  mentioned under IPC which is covered by Criminal Procedure Code CRPC. The nature of offence is categorised based on the degree or say frequency of the offence committed . The frequency of the offence can be recognised by the punishment of the offence mentioned in the section.Here, we are talking about cognizable and non-cognizable offence in particular. Cognizable offence is defined under section 2(c) of CRPC and non-cognizable offence is defined under 2(l) of CRPC. CRPC schedule 1 explains how the offence should be categorised under cognizable or non-cognizable offence. CRPC provides the place and manner, where should the investigation and trial of an offence shall take place. Offences are Classified depending on the nature of an offence and they are as follows:

Classification of offences are as follows-

1.Bailable or non-bailable offence

2.Cognizable and non-cognizable offence

3.Compoundable and non-compoundable offence


Cognizable offence

Cognizable offences is a offence where a person can be arrested by a police officer without a warrant. All offences under cognizable offences are considered as serious in nature and of high frequency . The police officer is under legal duty to investigate the crime without the order from magistrate. All cognizable offences are non-bailable in nature. Let’s take some examples of cognizable offence:

1.Murder (IPC Section 302)

2.Rape (IPC Section 375)

3.Dowry death (IPC Section 304B) 

4.Theft (IPC Section 378)

5.Kidnapping (IPC Section 360)

In cognizable offence complaint about the crime is not necessary , hence , police has the liberty to start the enquiry immediately . Under section 154 of CRPC a police officer is bound to register an FIR in case of cognizable crime committed or complaint to the magistrate. They are mostly non-bailable offences and not every court can conduct the trial of the case.


Non-cognizable offence

Non-cognizable offence is offence where a person cannot be arrested by a police officer without a warrant. Offences under non-cognizable offences are considered non-grievous in nature. The police officer cannot take legal action without the orders from court or magistrate. Non-cognizable offences are punishable with less than three years of imprisonment or fine according to the offence committed. In Non-cognizable offence complaint about the crime committed is necessary for the police enquiry to initiate. All non-cognizable offences are bailable in nature. Let’s take some example of non-cognizable offences.They are mostly bailable offences and any magistrate or magistrate of first class can conduct the trial of the case.

1.Cheating (IPC section 415)

2.Forgery (IPC section 463) 

3.Defamation (IPC section 499)

4.Causing miscarriage (IPC Section 312)

5.Assault (IPC section 351)

In such offence the victim can only make a complaint to the magistrate.

In non-cognizable Offences there is are proper steps to be followed for an accused to be arrested. The police officer files the chargesheet in the court which is then followed by a trial. After the trial if the accused is found to be guilty then the court passes the order to issue the warrant for the accused to be arrested.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more