BNSS | Police Report In Non-Cognizable Offence Is Deemed A 'Complaint'; Accused Must Be Heard Before Summons In Such Cases : Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has recently observed that a police report (charge-sheet) filed for a non-cognizable offence must be treated as a 'complaint' by the Magistrate and not as a police case/state case. This is in conformity with the Explanation to Section 2(1)(h) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The Court further noted that in such cases, a Judicial Magistrate cannot issue summons without first affording the accused an opportunity of being heard as has been mandated under the first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS. A Bench of Justice Praveen Kumar Giri observed thus while setting aside a cognizance-cum-summoning order passed by a Judicial Magistrate in Shahjahanpur, for a non-cognizable offence. The Court termed the case to be of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court noted that the Magistrate concerned erred in neither converting the charge sheet/police report disclosing 'non-cognizable offence' into 'complaint' nor taking cognizance under Section 210(1)(a) BNSS to proceed as 'trial of summons-case' instituted on complaint. In other words, the Court found faults with the act of the Magistrate concerned in taking cognizance under Section 210(1)(b) BNSS and summoning the applicant without providing him an opportunity of hearing [as provided under 1st proviso of Section 223(1) BNSS] and also erroneously proceeded as trial of summons-case instituted on police report rather than complaint. Case in brief Briefly put, the case concerned a dispute between neighbors regarding toilet waste drainage. The complainant alleged that the accused had constructed a soak-pit toilet incorrectly which caused dirty water to flow into the open drain in front of his house. The altercation escalated on August 10, 2024, leading to alleged abuse and assault. Consequently, a Non-Cognizable Report (NCR) was registered under Sections 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt) and 352 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) BNS. Following an investigation authorized by the Magistrate, the police submitted a charge-sheet. Now, the core issue was this: the Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on this charge-sheet treating it as a police report under Section 210(1)(b) of the BNSS. The Magistrate then summoned the accused asking him to face trial of summons-case instituted on police report. Challenging this order, the accused moved the HC.High Court's observations Justice Giri pointed out that the procedure adopted by the Magistrate was fundamentally flawed. Relying on Explanation to Section 2(1)(h) of the BNSS, the single judge stressed that when after the investigation, the commission of a non-cognizable offence was alleged, it must have been treated a 'complaint' by treating the police officer to be the complainant. The High Court observed that the Magistrate erroneously proceeded under Section 210(1)(b) (cognizance on police report) instead of Section 210(1)(a) (cognizance on complaint). The High Court clarified as to why treating the case as a 'complaint' rather than a 'police case' is not merely technical but the same affects the substantive rights of the accused and the procedure of the trial. The Court highlighted that under Section 223 BNSS [Examination of complainant], "no cognizance of an offence (on complaint) shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard”. It noted that by treating the matter as a police case, the Magistrate had denied the petitioners this statutory right. Justice Giri further noted that in a trial of a summons-case instituted on a complaint, Section 279 BNSS (Section 256 CrPC) applies and so, if the complainant does not appear or dies, the Magistrate shall acquit the accused. However, it added that this provision is not available in cases instituted on a police report (Section 281 BNSS), where discharge does not amount to acquittal. "In the trial of summons cases instituted on complaint, the Trial Court of Magistrate has the power under Section 279 BNSS to acquit the accused, if the complainant is absent or has passed away, but under Section 281 BNSS, in the Trial of summons cases instituted on police report, the trial court of Magistrate does not have such power to acquit the accused in case of non-appearance of complainant or his death", the Court remarked. Similarly, the Court also referred to Section 280 BNSS which allows a complainant to withdraw the complaint before a final order is passed, leading to acquittal. This is specific to complaint cases and the benefit of the provision isn't applicable in police cases. Against this backdrop, the HC noted that the Judicial Magistrate erroneously passed cognizance-cum-summoning order in derogation of the provisions of BNSS. Therefore, while quashing the summoning order, the High Court remanded the matter back to the Judicial...

BNSS | Police Report In Non-Cognizable Offence Is Deemed A 'Complaint'; Accused Must Be Heard Before Summons In Such Cases : Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

BNSS | Police Report In Non-Cognizable Offence Is Deemed A 'Complaint'; Accused Must Be Heard Before Summons In Such Cases : Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers