Jurisdiction Of Criminal Courts In India
Jurisdiction of Criminal Courts in India:
Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear and decide a case. In criminal law, it involves determining which court has the power to try a particular offense based on various factors like place of the offense, subject matter, and parties involved.
Types of Jurisdiction of Criminal Courts:
Territorial Jurisdiction: Power based on the geographical area where the offense was committed.
Pecuniary Jurisdiction: Power based on the amount of fine or severity of punishment.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Power to try specific types of offenses.
Hierarchical Jurisdiction: Power based on the level of the court (Sessions, Magistrate, High Court, Supreme Court).
Appellate Jurisdiction: Power to hear appeals from lower courts.
Important Sections Dealing with Jurisdiction
Section 177 CrPC: Territorial jurisdiction for offenses committed in a place.
Section 178 CrPC: Jurisdiction for offenses committed partly in one place and partly in another.
Section 179 CrPC: Jurisdiction of Courts to try offenses committed on the high seas.
Section 190 CrPC: Power of Magistrates to take cognizance of offenses.
Section 195 CrPC: Procedure in cases where certain offenses can only be prosecuted with the sanction of the court.
Case Law Analysis on Jurisdiction
Case 1: State of Punjab v. Ram Singh (AIR 1964 SC 287)
Issue: Territorial jurisdiction when offense is committed in multiple places.
Facts: An offense involved acts occurring partly in one jurisdiction and partly in another.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that the court where the last act was done or where the last event occurred can try the offense. If an offense is committed in multiple jurisdictions, the accused can be tried in any of those jurisdictions.
Significance: Clarified the principle of territorial jurisdiction under Section 178 CrPC.
Case 2: M.C. Chockalingam v. State of Madras (AIR 1964 SC 1237)
Issue: Jurisdiction of Magistrate courts for offenses punishable with imprisonment exceeding their powers.
Facts: A Magistrate tried an offense with punishment beyond his pecuniary and hierarchical jurisdiction.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that Magistrates have no jurisdiction to try offenses beyond the limits of their prescribed powers; such trials are void.
Significance: Emphasized the limits of hierarchical jurisdiction and magistrate’s powers.
Case 3: K.K. Verma v. Union of India (AIR 1961 SC 1031)
Issue: Jurisdiction to try military personnel in civil courts.
Facts: A soldier was tried in a civil court for an offense related to his service.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that offenses relating to military service are to be tried by court martial unless otherwise provided, but civil courts have jurisdiction over civilian offenses by military personnel.
Significance: Distinction between military and civil jurisdiction.
Case 4: Hirendra Nath Nandi v. State of West Bengal (AIR 1960 SC 941)
Issue: Jurisdiction of courts in cases of offenses committed outside India.
Facts: The accused committed an offense abroad.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that Indian courts have jurisdiction over certain offenses committed outside India if the accused is present in India and the offense affects Indian interests.
Significance: Extended jurisdiction to extraterritorial offenses under certain conditions.
Case 5: Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1976 SC 1442)
Issue: Appellate jurisdiction and powers of High Court.
Facts: The accused challenged the order of conviction by Sessions Court.
Judgment: The Supreme Court clarified the scope of appellate jurisdiction vested in High Courts under CrPC, emphasizing it includes reappraisal of evidence and jurisdictional questions.
Significance: Explained the appellate jurisdiction and powers of High Courts in criminal matters.
Summary Table
| Case | Key Principle |
|---|---|
| State of Punjab v. Ram Singh | Territorial jurisdiction for offenses in multiple places |
| M.C. Chockalingam v. State of Madras | Magistrates cannot try offenses beyond their jurisdiction |
| K.K. Verma v. Union of India | Military vs Civil court jurisdiction |
| Hirendra Nath Nandi v. West Bengal | Jurisdiction for extraterritorial offenses |
| Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab | Powers of High Court in appellate jurisdiction |
Additional Notes:
Territorial jurisdiction is generally the place where the crime was committed.
Courts cannot try cases beyond their pecuniary or hierarchical limits.
Certain offenses require sanction or prior approval before trial (e.g., offenses against public servants).
Jurisdictional challenges can be raised by accused but cannot be used as a tool for delay.
RELATED Blog
0 comments