👨‍⚖️🧠 All About Cognizance

🌟 Meaning of Cognizance - (To be aware or To take judicial notice)

'Taking cognizance' which merely means judicial application of the mind of the Magistrate to the facts mentioned in the complaint with a view to take further action.

🌟 When is it not a Cognizance?

👍 R.R. Chari v. Uttar Pradesh 1951
When the Magistrate applies his mind not for the purpose of proceeding under the subsequent sections of this Chapter, but for taking action of some other kind, e.g. ordering investigation under S.156(3), or issuing a search warrant for the purpose of the investigation.

🌟 Can a Magistrate order investigation after taking cognizance?

Yes, 202 CrPC, Magistrate can direct an investigation to be made either by a police officer or by any other person. But it is only for a-
limited purpose: Only for helping the Magistrate to decide whether or not there is sufficient ground to proceed further.

Note: Case can be said to be instituted in a Court only when the Court takes cognizance.
(Chapter Caption)


🌟 Is the magistrate bound to take cognizance when he receives a Complaint?

No, Not bound to take cognizance if the facts alleged in the complaint, disclose the commission of an offence.
Discretion- "May take Cognizance"

👍 D. Lakshminarayana Reddy vs. V. Narayana Reddy 1976

Allegations disclose cognizable offence and the forwarding of the complaint to the police for investigation under s. 156(3) will be conducive to justice and save the valuable time of the Magistrate in enquiring into a matter which was primarily the duty of the police to investigate, he will be justified in adopting that course as an alternative


🌟 What is the difference between an investigation under S. 156(3) and S.202 of CrPC?

📝 GIST- Chapter 14 containing s. 190 deals with post-cognizance stage, Chapter 12, so far as Magistrate is concerned, deals with pre- cognizance stage that is to say, once a Magistrate starts acting u/s. 190 and the provisions following, he cannot resort to s. 156(3).

👍 D. Lakshminarayana Reddy vs. V. Narayana Reddy 1976 👇

1. Difference on Stages—
In case of a complaint regarding the commission of a cognizable offence, the power under 156(3) can be invoked by the Magistrate before he takes cognizance of the offence under 190(1)(a). But if he once takes such cognizance and embarks upon the procedure embodied in Chapter XV, he is not competent to switch back to the pre-cognizance stage and avail of 156(3).

2. Difference on Purpose—
156(3) Preemptory Reminder or Intimation- which embraces the entire continuous process which begins with the collection of evidence and ends with a report or charge sheet under 173. On the other hand 202 comes in at a stage when some evidence has been collected by the Magistrate in proceedings under Chapter XV, but the same is deemed insufficient to take a decision as to the next step in the prescribed procedure.

💯 MCQ on Cognizance-
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/2645

@CurrentLegalGK

Hi, this group's admin is copying your content. Just thought you should know

🤝 Thankx for Informing

☝️Hope this channel loves Quality content 😝

@CurrentLegalGK

🔗⛓️👐 Section 43(3) BNSS Handcuffing

🌟 Corresponding section- 46 CrPC

🌟 Prem Shankar Shukla vs Delhi Administration, 1980 and Sunil batra, 1978 Guidelines—

Handcuffing is, prima facie, inhuman, unreasonable & Arbitrary.

Prem Shankar Declared the use of handcuffs unconstitutional under article 21. However, the court has carved out certain exceptions to the general practice of use of handcuffs

🌟 Aeltemesh Rein v. Union of India, (1988)
SC directed UOI to make Guidelines and rules for Handcuffing use.

🌟 Citizens For Democracy vs State Of Assam, 1995
The Supreme Court relied on its decisions in Sunil Batra and Prem Shankar Shukla cases laid down guidelines for use of handcuff and directed all ranks of police and prison authorities to meticulously obey the guidelines.

📑 Guidelines are as follows—

⚡1. General rule
Handcuffs or other fetters shall not be forced on a prisoner - convicted or under-trial-while lodged in a jail anywhere in the country or while transporting or in transit from one jail to another or from jail to court and back. The police and the jail authorities, ON THEIR OWN, shall have no authority to direct the hand- cuffing of any inmate of a jail in the country or during transport from one jail to another or from jail to court and back.

2. Exceptions-
Where the police or the jail authorities have a well-grounded basis for drawing a strong inference that a particular prisoner is likely to jump jail or break out of the custody:-
🫱then he be produced before the Magistrate concerned and
🫱Prayer for permission to handcuff the prisoner be made before the said Magistrate.

Magistrate discretion—
Save in rare cases of concrete proof regarding proneness of the prisoner to violence,'his tendency to escape, he being so dangerous/desperate and the finding that no other practical way of forbidding escape is available, the ✅Magistrate may grant permission to handcuff the prisoner.

3. Special orders required in remand order for judicial/police custody (167), execution of a warrant of arrest.

4. When police can handcuff without order of magistrate
If Person is arrested by the police without warrant the police officer concerned may if he is satisfied, on the basis of the guidelines given above (dangerous/desperate, tendency to escape etc..) that it is necessary to handcuff such a person, he may do so till the time he is taken to the police station and thereafter his production before the Magistrate. Further use of fetters thereafter can only be under the orders of the Magistrate as already indicated above.

5. All Ranks of Police officers have to follow the above guidelines and non compliance will be dealt as contempt of court.


🌟 Table is attached for List of Offences in which Handcuffing is allowed.

Is 43(3) BNSS correct as per guidelines?

🌟 Compensation Awarded
Sabah Al Zarid v. State of Assam, 2023 awarded Rs. 5,00,000/- compensation to the petitioner which was payable by the respondent and held the handcuffing of the petitioner by the respondent contrary to the law laid down by Supreme Court.

@CurrentLegalGK

Article 361: Immunity shield until Governor in office 🔗
#express_explained

💉👨‍💼 Immunity to President and Governor

🌟 Provisions: Article 361, S. 133 CPC,

🌟 Case- Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India, 2006 that outlined the immunity enjoyed by the Governor “even on allegation of personal malafides,” the Supreme Court held that “the position in law, is that the Governor enjoys complete immunity.”

🌟 What about civil immunity?

No Civil case can be instituted during his term of office whether an act is done before or after entering his office as President/ Governor until the expiration of two months next after NOTICE in writing has been delivered to the President/Governor or left at his office–
✓ Stating the nature of the
proceedings.
✓ Cause of action,
✓ Name,
✓ Description and Place of residence of the party by whom such proceedings are to be instituted and the
✓ Relief which he claims.


🌟 Exceptions—
1. Article 61:-
✓ Conduct of the President (only) be brought under review
by any court, tribunal or body
✓ Appointed or designated
by either House of Parliament
✓ For investigation of a charge under article 61

2. Case against State:-
Right of any person to bring appropriate proceedings against GOI or GOS.

3. After he ceases from the office.

#Question
Mention the provisions of laws dealing with immunity for Judges

@CurrentLegalGK

📝🌟 RJS MOCK TEST 3

Share your scores with difficult questions.

@CurrentLegalGK

🌟 Guys 6 Days Left

🏆 Participate and Win-
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/2725

🌟 New Criminal Laws Bare Act Books

@CurrentLegalGK

🔥😎 RJS CLEAR HOGA???

This time RJS is going to be tough either the paper or the cut off, I hope it goes with the former one.

Anyways in both the situations we have to study hard with a proper daily plan, which must contain the practical syllabus coverage on time with daily practice and time for revisions and review of tests...

If you need Questions and MCQs then Participate in the Quiz Making Contest pinned above 👆 (31 entries recieved till now) all participants will get something 🙂

Let's predict the RJS cut off before the exam and not afterwards because we have control over it now.

My Estimation says:- 70-75 if the paper is aligned with the PYQ analysis & a little bit of evolving pattern.

Tip: Solve all State law PYQ especially Rajasthan exams.
For Hindi and English solve RPSC Exam papers as well.

@CurrentLegalGK

Misuse Of 498A IPC : Supreme Court Requests Parliament To Amend Corresponding Section In Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/misuse-of-498a-ipc-supreme-court-requests-parliament-to-amend-corresponding-section-in-bharatiya-nyaya-sanhita-256930

🔥 SC brings attention of law ministry to amend 498A

📌 ACHIN GUPTA v. HARYANA, 2024 

📌 Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, 2010 (leading)
Inviting the attention of the legislature to bring changes to the provision while taking into consideration the pragmatic realities and public opinion.

📌 Facts- HC refused 482

📌 85 & 86 of BNS Cruelty (Cognizable )

🖼️ Bhajan Lal v. Haryana 1992
Scope of 482 and categories of cases where Quashing of F.I.R.

🌟Issue with 7th Category of Bhajan lal

📌 HC- Didn't qualify 7th Category of Bhajan lal

📌 SC- 7th Category should be applied, and if Court convinced that the complaint with an oblique motive then even if the FIR and the chargesheet disclose the commission of a cognizable offence the Court with a view to doing substantial justice should read in between the lines the oblique motive of the complainant and take a pragmatic view of the matter."

@CurrentLegalGK

Pre-Arrest Bail To Accused Residing Abroad
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/pre-arrest-bail-to-accused-residing-abroad-256604

Lingari Obulamma v. L. Venkata Reddy, 1979

Performing datta homa and saptapadi are the two ceremonies essential to constitute a valid marriage.

@CurrentLegalGK

Laxmi Devi v. Satya Narayan 1994

Since there was no proof that “saptapadi” was performed in the second marriage, no offence of bigamy was committed.

🌟 Anticipatory Bail by Person residing outside India.

🌟 Provision:- 482 BNSS
New law has made a provision that a person accused of committing a gang rape to all woman who are under eighteen years of age can not seek the anticipatory bail.


🌟ANTICIPATORY BAIL LAW—
✓ Anticipatory bail application has to be supported by the affidavit of the person apprehending his arrest unlike in regular bail by Advocate's affidavit.

✓ Issue of filing Vakalatnama

🌟 Case Laws:-

📌 Souda Beevi vs Mr. V. Ajith, 2011 (foreign residing person)

The purpose of an anticipatory bail order is that a person should make himself available for investigation without the threat of arrest floating on his shoulders. But in this case, the order of anticipatory bail was kept in cold storage for months and was misused.

📌 Anu Mathew v. Kerala, 2020

🌟 Issues:-

1. Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused residing in a foreign country❓

2. If the court has jurisdiction, then how should such jurisdiction be exercised❓


🥇First Issue—
✓ Right to Travel Abroad is a fundamental right as per Personal Liberty (Article 21)

✓ Fundamental right to access courts for determination of his rights. (Article 14 & 21)

✓ Pre-arrest bail can be supported by the affidavit of parokar of the applicant.

🥈Second Issue—
Illustrations to be seen while exercising discretion to grant pre-arrest bail:

✓ Whether there is bonafide apprehension of arrest in a non-bailable offence in India,

✓ Whether the accused is not likely to cooperate in investigation/trial processes,

✓ Whether custodial interrogation is required,

✓ Whether the Accused bonafide went abroad as part of their job compulsions or he went abroad to flee away from the arm of law,

✓ Whether the accused was already abroad at the time of registration of the crime,

✓ Whether the accused had absconded from India after knowing about the registration of a Non-Bailable offence,

✓ Whether the accused intends to come back to India and cooperate with the investigation,

✓ Whether the attempt of the accused is to buy time and stultify the investigation and the trial.

✓ Conditions—
In Addition to conditions under 438 (2) (i) & (iii) Cr.P.C. Court can also add a condition that the accused person must within a reasonable and definite time come to India to cooperate and submit himself to investigation by police and in case he fails, the anticipatory bail would automatically vacate.

🌟 Although no provision under CrPC makes it mandatory for the accused person to be physically present in India before his pre-arrest bail application can be heard on merits, suitable conditions can be imposed by the court based on facts and circumstances of the case to ensure his presence.

The subject of bail belongs to the blurred area of the criminal justice system and largely hinges on the hunch of the bench, otherwise called judicial discretion.
~ Justice Krishna Iyer

#Question
Travel Abroad is F.R. was held in which case?

#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK