Cognizance of Offences and Timelines (ss.210–214 BNSS) — BNSS (Criminal Law II) Notes

Cognizance of Offences and Timelines (ss.210–214 BNSS)

“Cognizance” is the judicial equivalent of a court waking up. Until a Magistrate takes cognizance, a case is just a file; the moment he does, the machinery of trial begins to turn. The word is not defined in the Sanhita, which is exactly why examiners love to ask what it means.

To take cognizance is for a Magistrate to apply his judicial mind to the facts alleged for the purpose of proceeding — not merely to receive a paper. It is cognizance of the offence, not the offender (so it does not matter who set the law in motion).

A. Modes of taking cognizance (s.210 [s.190 CrPC])

A Magistrate may take cognizance:

On receiving a complaint of facts constituting an offence;
On a police report of such facts; or
Upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge.

B. Limitations on the power

Cognizance of certain offences only on complaint (ss.215–222). Some offences (defamation, offences against public justice, marriage offences) need a complaint by the specified person or a court — the police-report route is barred (see 2.11).
Sanction. Prosecution of a public servant or judge for acts in official duty needs prior sanction (ss.218–219).
A civil dispute cannot be given a criminal colour. Where the real dispute is civil (title, partition, contract), the Magistrate should not take cognizance of a manufactured criminal charge.

C. Timelines (BNSS innovation)

The Sanhita hard-codes deadlines to speed the pre-trial stage — e.g. the Magistrate must decide on cognizance/issue of process within fixed periods, and supply documents to the accused within 14 days.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — the stranger’s complaint

Facts. A sees B beaten by a group; the next day A — a stranger, not the victim — files a complaint naming the assailants. The accused argue the court cannot take cognizance at a stranger’s instance.

Rule. Cognizance is of the offence, not the offender, and s.210 allows it on a complaint by any person (subject to the s.215–222 exceptions).

Apply. Assault is not a complaint-only offence, so A’s status as a stranger is irrelevant; the Magistrate may take cognizance.

Conclusion. Cognizance is valid — the decoy is that only the victim may set the law in motion.

Section 210(1) BNSS: “any Magistrate of the first class… may take cognizance of any offence — (a) upon receiving a complaint of facts… (b) upon a police report of such facts; (c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed.”

In Simple Terms: A Magistrate can wake up to an offence three ways — a complaint, a police report, or his own information/knowledge — and it is the offence, not the complainant, that matters.

flowchart TD
    ROOT["Taking cognizance s.210"]:::root
    ROOT --> A["On a complaint"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> B["On a police report"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> C["On information / own knowledge"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> D["Limits: complaint-only offences,<br/>sanction, no civil dispute in disguise"]:::sidebox
    classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:1px,color:#000;
    classDef leaf fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
    classDef sidebox fill:#FDE7C9,stroke:#B45309,color:#000;
    linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;

Case Laws

R.R. Chari v. State of U.P. (1951) — cognizance is taken when the Magistrate applies his mind for the purpose of proceeding, not merely on receipt of a report.
Gopal Das Sindhi v. State of Assam (1961) — mere receipt of a complaint is not cognizance; the Magistrate must apply his mind.
Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. (2006) — a civil dispute must not be converted into a criminal prosecution.

📄 Full notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past KSLU questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · 10 Solved Problems · All BNSS (Criminal Law II) topics