Section 213 of BNSS, 2023 — Cognizance of Offences by Court of Session

Introduction

Section 213 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) deals with the power of a Court of Session to take cognizance of offences.

The general rule under this provision is that a Court of Session cannot take cognizance of an offence as a court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate under the BNSS.

The provision establishes the procedural relationship between Magistrates and Courts of Session and ensures that, ordinarily, a Sessions Court receives a case through the committal process before exercising original criminal jurisdiction.

Meaning of Cognizance by Court of Session

Taking cognizance means the judicial application of mind to an alleged offence for the purpose of proceeding under criminal law.

Section 213 establishes a restriction on the ordinary original jurisdiction of the Court of Session. A Sessions Court generally cannot directly take cognizance of an offence as a court of original jurisdiction.

Ordinarily, the case must first come before a competent Magistrate and be committed to the Court of Session in accordance with the BNSS.

Statutory Basis

Section 213 provides:

“Except as otherwise expressly provided by this Sanhita or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence as a Court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate under this Sanhita.”

The provision therefore contains two important aspects:

• The general rule that a Court of Session cannot ordinarily take direct cognizance as a court of original jurisdiction.
• The exception that direct cognizance may be permitted where the BNSS or another law expressly provides for it.

Object and Purpose

The principal purpose of Section 213 is to regulate the exercise of original criminal jurisdiction by the Court of Session.

The provision maintains the procedural role of the Magistrate in the initial stage of criminal proceedings while reserving trial of offences falling within the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court for that Court after the required committal.

It therefore creates a structured relationship between the Magistrate’s Court and the Court of Session.

Essential Elements

1. General Prohibition on Direct Cognizance

A Court of Session cannot ordinarily take cognizance of an offence directly as a court of original jurisdiction.

2. Case Must Ordinarily Be Committed

The ordinary requirement is that the case must first be committed to the Court of Session by a Magistrate under the BNSS.

3. Committal by a Magistrate

The Magistrate acts as the procedural link between the initiation of the criminal case and the exercise of original jurisdiction by the Sessions Court.

4. Exceptions Are Recognised

The restriction is not absolute.

Section 213 begins with the words “Except as otherwise expressly provided”, meaning that the BNSS or another applicable law may expressly permit a Court of Session to take cognizance in a different manner.

Procedure

The general procedural framework can be understood as follows:

1. An offence is reported or otherwise brought before the criminal justice system.
2. The competent Magistrate deals with the matter according to the applicable provisions of the BNSS.
3. Where the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, the Magistrate commits the case to the Court of Session in accordance with the BNSS.
4. The Court of Session receives the committed case.
5. The Sessions Court may then exercise its jurisdiction over the case in accordance with the provisions governing Sessions trials.

Cognizance and Committal

Cognizance and committal are distinct concepts.

Cognizance

Cognizance refers to the judicial act of applying mind to an alleged offence for the purpose of proceeding under criminal law.

Committal

Committal refers to the procedural act by which a Magistrate sends a case to the Court of Session for trial where the law requires the case to be tried by that Court.

Section 213 connects these concepts by providing that, ordinarily, the Court of Session takes cognizance as a court of original jurisdiction only after the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate.

Role of the Magistrate

The Magistrate has an important procedural role before a Sessions Court exercises its original jurisdiction.

Where the case is one that is required to be tried by the Court of Session, the Magistrate commits the case to that Court in accordance with the applicable provisions of the BNSS.

The Magistrate’s role at this stage does not mean that the Magistrate conducts the Sessions trial. The trial is conducted by the Court of Session after committal.

Court of Session as a Court of Original Jurisdiction

Section 213 specifically uses the expression “Court of original jurisdiction.”

The restriction therefore concerns the Court of Session taking cognizance directly in its original criminal jurisdiction.

The provision does not mean that a Sessions Court lacks jurisdiction over criminal cases. Rather, it establishes the ordinary procedural route through which a case reaches the Sessions Court.

Exceptions and Limitations

The general rule under Section 213 is subject to express exceptions.

Express Exception Under BNSS

If the BNSS itself expressly provides that a Court of Session may take cognizance without the ordinary committal process, that specific provision will apply.

Exception Under Another Law

Section 213 also recognises an exception where another law for the time being in force expressly provides for a different procedure.

Therefore, the rule under Section 213 must always be read subject to any specific statutory provision governing a particular offence or proceeding.

Important Distinctions

Magistrate’s Cognizance vs Sessions Court’s Cognizance

Section 210 deals with cognizance by Magistrates.

Section 213 deals with the circumstances in which a Court of Session may take cognizance as a court of original jurisdiction.

The two provisions therefore govern different judicial authorities.

Cognizance vs Committal

Cognizance involves judicial application of mind to an offence.

Committal is the procedural transmission of a case from the Magistrate to the Court of Session where the law requires the Sessions Court to conduct the trial.

Court of Session vs Magistrate

A Magistrate ordinarily handles the initial procedural stages of a criminal case and may commit a case to the Court of Session where required.

The Court of Session then exercises jurisdiction over cases committed to it and conducts trials falling within its jurisdiction.

Committal vs Conviction

Committal does not mean that the accused has been found guilty.

It merely places the case before the Court competent to conduct the Sessions trial.

BNSS and CrPC

Section 213 of BNSS substantially corresponds to Section 193 of the CrPC, 1973.

The basic rule remains substantially unchanged.

Under both provisions, a Court of Session ordinarily cannot take cognizance of an offence as a court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate.

Both provisions also recognise that an express provision in the procedural law or another law may create an exception to the general rule.

Thus, Section 213 primarily continues the earlier CrPC framework under the BNSS.

Relationship with Section 210

Section 210 concerns cognizance by a Magistrate.

Section 213 concerns cognizance by the Court of Session.

The provisions therefore establish different rules for different courts.

Where a case is initially before a Magistrate and is required to be tried by the Court of Session, the Magistrate performs the necessary committal function before the Sessions Court exercises its original jurisdiction.

Relationship with Section 232

Section 232 of BNSS deals specifically with commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it.

Where, upon receiving a case, the Magistrate finds that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, the case is committed to that Court in accordance with Section 232.

Section 213 establishes the general rule concerning cognizance by the Sessions Court, while Section 232 provides the relevant committal mechanism.

Relationship with BNS and BSA

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) primarily defines offences and prescribes punishments.

The BNSS establishes the procedural framework for investigation, cognizance, inquiry and trial.

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) governs the law of evidence.

Section 213 is therefore a procedural provision determining the circumstances in which a Court of Session may exercise original criminal jurisdiction.

Important BNSS Provisions

• Section 210 — Cognizance of offences by Magistrate.
• Section 211 — Transfer on application of accused.
• Section 212 — Making over of cases to Magistrates.
• Section 213 — Cognizance of offences by Court of Session.
• Section 232 — Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it.
• Section 233 — Procedure to be followed when there is a complaint case and police investigation in respect of the same offence.

Common Confusions

Can a Court of Session directly take cognizance of every offence?

No.

The general rule under Section 213 is that the Court of Session cannot take cognizance of an offence as a court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate.

Does the Sessions Court have jurisdiction only after conviction by a Magistrate?

No.

Committal is not a conviction. It is a procedural step by which the case is placed before the Court of Session for trial.

Is committal the same as taking cognizance?

No.

Cognizance and committal are distinct procedural concepts.

Is the rule under Section 213 absolute?

No.

The section itself recognises exceptions where the BNSS or another law expressly provides otherwise.

Does the Magistrate conduct the Sessions trial?

No.

Where a case is committed to the Court of Session, the Sessions Court conducts the trial in accordance with the applicable provisions of the BNSS.

Example

Suppose a person is accused of an offence that is triable exclusively by the Court of Session.

The case initially comes before a Magistrate. After following the applicable preliminary procedure, the Magistrate commits the case to the Court of Session under the BNSS.

The Sessions Court then receives the committed case and exercises its jurisdiction over the Sessions trial.

The Magistrate’s committal is therefore the procedural step that ordinarily enables the Sessions Court to exercise original jurisdiction over the case.

Topic at a Glance

• Topic: Cognizance of offences by Court of Session
• BNSS Section: Section 213
• General rule: Sessions Court cannot ordinarily take direct cognizance as a court of original jurisdiction
• Ordinary requirement: Case must be committed by a Magistrate
• Exception: Express provision under BNSS or another law may provide otherwise
• Related provision: Section 232
• CrPC counterpart: Section 193 of the CrPC
• Core principle: Committal ordinarily precedes exercise of original jurisdiction by the Court of Session

Quick Revision

• Section 213 BNSS deals with cognizance of offences by the Court of Session.
• A Court of Session ordinarily cannot take cognizance directly as a court of original jurisdiction.
• The case must ordinarily be committed to it by a Magistrate.
• The rule is subject to express exceptions under the BNSS or another law.
• Committal is different from cognizance.
• Committal is different from conviction.
• Section 232 provides the procedure for commitment of a case to the Court of Session where the offence is triable exclusively by that Court.
• Section 213 substantially corresponds to Section 193 CrPC.
• The provision regulates the relationship between Magistrate proceedings and Sessions Court jurisdiction.

ALSO READ: Section 212 – Making over of cases to Magistrates

Conclusion

Section 213 of BNSS establishes the ordinary procedural rule governing the exercise of original criminal jurisdiction by a Court of Session. A Sessions Court ordinarily receives jurisdiction over an offence through committal by a Magistrate rather than by directly taking cognizance. This framework maintains the procedural role of Magistrates while ensuring that offences falling within the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court are ultimately tried by the appropriate court.