This article has been written by Jenia Begam from LJD Law College, University of Calcutta

Table of Contents

Introduction

Criminal law is an essential area of the law that handles grave crimes and keeps society from falling into chaos. It is made up of both substantive and procedural law, with procedural law acting as the framework for the application of substantive law. The substantive laws would be meaningless without procedural law because it would be difficult to prosecute offenders. The complementary nature of procedural and substantive legislation guarantees the accused a comprehensive and fair trial.

Ensuring a comprehensive and equitable trial while taking natural justice principles into account is the primary goal of the criminal process. This entails several procedures, including responding to motions, complaints, and discovery in pretrial procedural litigation. The acknowledgment of the offense, initiation of proceedings, procedure review, and decision-making are all part of the trial process.

The authority of the Magistrate to take cognizance of an offense is covered in a distinct chapter of the Code of Criminal Procedure, subject to specific limitations outlined in Sections 195 to 197 ^[1]. The limitations for taking cognizance of an offense outlined in Chapter XXXVI of the Code are the main topic of this article.

Understanding Cognizance

The old French word “connaissance,” which means “recognition, wisdom, knowledge, familiarity,” and the verb “conoistre,” which means “to know,” are the sources of the word cognizance. It also comes from the Latin word “cognosis,” in which the words “gnosis” means “to know” and “con” means “with.”

The criminal procedure code does not define the term “cognizance,” but the court’s rulings and numerous precedents provide an understanding of what it means. The definition of cognizance according to a dictionary refers to “having knowledge about something,” “taking account of,” “taking note of,” and “gaining knowledge about.”

According to Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary (1988), cognizance is the authority granted to a court to handle an issue based on mental awareness or awareness of something. It also refers to the judicial investigation of an issue and the exercise of jurisdiction, or the authority to ascertain reasons. Taking cognizance of an offence entails becoming aware of the alleged commission of an offence.

In general, cognizance refers to “knowledge” or “notice” . Before starting the trial, the court must take cognizance, which is the application of the judicial mind to the alleged offence.

In the case of Ajit Kumar Palit vs State Of West Bengal^[2] , According to the Supreme Court, there is no mystical or esoteric meaning to the term “word cognizance” under criminal law and procedure. It implies simply to become aware of, and when used to a Court of Judges, to be knowledgeable of judicially.

Cognizance is a Offence or not the Offender ?

In the case of Sonu Gupta v. Deepak Gupta 2015^[3] , The Supreme Court held that cognizance is taken of the offense, not the offender. Although an accused can seek discharge at the framing of charge stage if they can prove insufficient materials for charge framing, this exercise is only required at a later stage, not at the stage of taking cognizance and summoning the accused based on the prima facie case, Section 190 and 204 CrPC deal with the cognizance of an offense, while Section 204 applies if a magistrate finds sufficient grounds for proceeding further through the processes.

What is taking Cognizance

The term “take cognizance” of an offense by a competent magistrate is not defined under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) or other Acts. “Taking cognizance” refers to the process of “becoming aware of” or “taking notice judicially” of something. In criminal law, it has no esoteric significance. Rather, it relates to receiving notification of an offense and filing a lawsuit under Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

After taking account of the details in the police report or complaint, the court grants judicial notice of the offense. Taking cognizance allows the magistrate to file a formal complaint against an offender or to decide if there is sufficient evidence to begin a judicial proceeding.

Cognizance of offense by Magistrate

According to Sections 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code ( CrPC)^[4], a magistrate has to identify sufficient grounds to proceed further by granting processes after taking cognizance of the offense; in other words, Section 190 speaks about the cognizance of the offense.

The processes of taking cognizance are outlined in the Section 190(1) a, b, and c of CrPC . After receiving a complaint, the magistrate becomes aware of the offense and applies their judgment to the proceedings under Section 200 of CrPC^[5] , and the following sections. When the complainant is questioned to ascertain if the allegations in the complaint are true or sufficient, it is also assumed that the magistrate would take notice.

However the only purpose of the inquiry or investigation permitted under Section 202 of the CrPC ^[6]is to ascertain whether the allegations in the complaint are true or false and if the procedure should be issued. This inquiry or trial takes place after the cognizance step.

Understanding the Limitation of taking Cognizance

A basic concept that controls the court’s Cognizance of offenses is the factum of limitation. In the case of Assistant Collector Bombay vs. L.R. Melwani,^[7] the Supreme Court decided that while a complaint’s late submission may be taken into account while making a decision, it does not provide grounds for the complaint to be dismissed. The 42nd Law Commission of India, Chapter XXXVI, introduced limitations in 1973 for several offenses in the Sections 467–473^[8] of CrPC, for example, only apply to offenses that carry a maximum three-year imprisonment sentence.

The bar to take cognizance after the period of limitation has passed when it will get started, how to figure out it, excluded periods, and when the period of limitation can be extended are all covered in this chapter. It also discusses the legal framework for limitation in continuing offenses.

Importance of Limitation Period

A legal framework known as the Period of Limitation shields defendants’ rights by ensuring the validity and importance of evidence, prohibiting them from being charged for long-since-taken acts, and providing them with a fair chance to defend themselves. Additionally, it promotes prompt inquiry, guaranteeing precise fact-finding and the pursuit of justice.

The importance of current and relevant matters increases the efficiency of the judiciary by avoiding the excessive burden of stale cases in courts. Victims can get closure and move on with their lives when criminal proceedings are promptly resolved.

A fair trial depends on the preservation of evidence, which is another benefit of the Statute of Limitations. It is crucial to maintain a balance between the interests of society and those of the individual since this ensures that justice is carried down without causing the accused person unnecessary suffering during the legal process.

Challenges of the Period of Limitation in the Criminal Justice System

• Outdated Rules: Some contend that some statutes of limitations, particularly for crimes that carry a penalty, may be out of date and out of step with contemporary legal standards.

• The Complexity and Ambiguity: Determining the appropriate statute of limitations can be confusing and challenging due to the CrPC’s exemption clauses and tolling provisions.

• Delay Reporting: When victims or witnesses fail to report, it becomes more difficult to collect evidence and bring charges within the specified period.

• Ambiguity: There may be disagreements over the beginning and end of the statute of limitations due to the notion of “continuing offenses”.

Special Statutes and Offenses

In India, the Period of Limitation for taking cognizance of offenses is governed by Sections 467–473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. It describes the statute of limitations for various types of offenses according to their gravity and character, which is important information for deciding whether to file charges against defendants.

Offenses Punishable with Fine Only or Imprisonment up to 1 Year: The definition of this kind of crime includes less severe acts such as small theft, public discomfort, and simple assault. The statute of limitations is one year from the date of the offense, or when the victim or police became knowledgeable about it.
Offenses Punishable with Imprisonment up to 3 Years: Includes crimes such as robbery, criminal intimidation, and intentionally inflicting harm. The period of limitations is three years from the day the crime was committed or when the victim or police learned about it.
Offenses without the period of Limitations: This type includes heinous actions such as terrorism, actions of war against the government, and offenses under particular laws such as the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Section 468: Offenses with Prescribed Periods ^[9]

According to this section , a court cannot consider a crime falling under a certain category once the period of limitations has passed. For fine-only offenses, the period of limitations is six months; for one-year incarceration, it is one year; and for one-year imprisonment that does not result in three-year imprisonment, it is three years. When determining the period of limitations for offenses that can be prosecuted concurrently, the most serious punishment—or, in certain cases, the most serious punishment is taken into consideration.

Section 467: Definition “Special Limitation for Certain Offenses” ^[10]

The purpose of this section is to ascertain the parameters and extent of the time frame allotted for establishing jurisdiction over an offense under Section 468. For this reason, unless otherwise noted, the term “period of limitation” is mandated. If there are no extraordinary circumstances or the Code is amended to change the laws, then violating this time is deemed higher vires.

Section 469: Commencement of the period of limitation^[11]

In criminal proceedings, the period of limitations begins the day the offense was committed, the day the victim or the police officer learned about the offense, or the day either party knew the accused. The initial day the accused was known is not included in the computation if the accused is unidentified or unknown. This chapter does not cover the first day when the Period of limitations starts.

In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Sanjay Kumar ^[12] the supreme court ruled that the period of limitations would start when the public analyses report in the event of alteration was received, not when the sample was collected.

Section 473: Extension of Period in Certain Cases^[13]

This section has significance as it focuses on administering justice. It provides the complainant or the individual who feels wronged with an opportunity to file a lawsuit even after the statute of limitations has passed.

The lawsuit should normally not be initiated after the allotted time has passed, but in some extraordinary cases, the court may let the case be instituted.

Conclusion

A basic legal concept that ensures justice promptly and safeguards the rights of the accused is the Period of Limitation. It finds a balance between the objectives of justice and practical concerns by setting down different periods of limitations for certain types of offenses. Periodic reviews and revisions, however, could be required to keep it current and in line with changing standards of justice and fairness in India’s legal system.