Criminal Procedure: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)
Territorial Jurisdiction Sections 197 to 209
Territorial Jurisdiction of Criminal Courts: Chapter XIV of the BNSS, 2023, Sections 197 to 209, the Special Cases and Offences Committed Outside India
A criminal court can try only an offence that the law places within its territory. Chapter XIV of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 fixes which court that is. Its thirteen sections begin with a rule of great simplicity — an offence is tried where it was committed — and then spend twelve sections dealing with the cases in which that rule gives no answer, because the offence was committed in several places at once, or because the act was in one place and its consequence in another, or because nobody can say where it happened at all.
The chapter matters in practice for two reasons. A trial by a court without territorial jurisdiction is open to challenge, though the consequence is narrower than is often assumed. And the sections are drafted so as to give the prosecution a choice in most of the special cases, which means that an objection to jurisdiction is rarely as strong as it looks.
1. The General Rule: Section 197
Section 197, BNSS 2023 Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. |
Figure 1: The rule and the special cases
The word ordinarily is what makes the rest of the chapter possible. Section 197 states a default, not an exclusive rule, and the sections that follow displace it wherever the default would be inconvenient or impossible to apply. The place where the offence was committed remains the natural forum, and where a section gives a choice, the court where the offence occurred is ordinarily the appropriate one.
📖 Y. Abraham Ajith v. Inspector of Police, Chennai, (2004) 8 SCC 100 Facts: A wife alleged cruelty and harassment by her husband and his relatives at the matrimonial home in one place. She afterwards left and went to live in another place, and lodged her complaint there. The accused contended that the court in the second place had no territorial jurisdiction, since none of the acts complained of had occurred there. Held: The Supreme Court held that the complaint was not maintainable in the court in which it was filed. Jurisdiction under the provision corresponding to section 197 depends on where the offence was committed, and the sections dealing with the special cases operate only where a part of the offence, or a consequence forming part of it, occurred within the local area. The mere fact that the complainant had subsequently taken up residence within the jurisdiction of the court, and was suffering the effects of the earlier conduct there, did not confer jurisdiction: no part of the cause of action had arisen in that place. The Court held that the complaint should be returned for presentation to the proper court, and it emphasised that convenience to the complainant is not a substitute for jurisdiction. Ratio: Jurisdiction depends on where the offence was committed or where a part of it or its consequence occurred. The subsequent residence of the complainant, without any part of the offence occurring there, does not confer it. |
2. Where the Offence Is Spread: Section 198
Section 198 deals with four situations in which the offence cannot be located in a single place, and in each of them the offence may be inquired into or tried by a court having jurisdiction over any of the areas concerned.
Clause | The situation | Illustration |
|---|---|---|
(a) | It is uncertain in which of several local areas the offence was committed | A body is found near a district boundary and it cannot be said on which side the killing took place |
(b) | The offence was committed partly in one local area and partly in another | A conspiracy formed in one district and executed in another |
(c) | The offence is a continuing one, and continues to be committed in more local areas than one | The continued withholding of a document, or a continuing failure to comply with a statutory duty |
(d) | The offence consists of several acts done in different local areas | A cheating carried out by acts in more than one place, or a course of harassment spread over several districts |
2.1 What is a continuing offence
📖 State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi, (1972) 2 SCC 890 Facts: A prosecution was launched for a failure to furnish annual returns by a prescribed date under a statute. The question was whether the offence was a continuing one, so that a fresh offence was committed on each day the default persisted and the period of limitation ran afresh each day, or whether it was complete once and for all on the date of the default. Held: The Supreme Court drew the distinction that has been applied ever since. A continuing offence is one that is susceptible of continuance, and is distinguishable from an offence which is committed once and for all. It arises out of a failure to obey or comply with a rule or its requirement, and which involves a penalty, the liability for which continues until the rule or requirement is obeyed or complied with. On every occasion that such disobedience or non-compliance occurs and recurs, there is the offence committed. By contrast, where the statute fixes a date by which a thing is to be done and the omission is complete on that date, the offence is committed once and for all on that day, and the fact that the consequences continue does not make it a continuing offence. The Court held that the offence before it was of the second kind. Ratio: A continuing offence is one whose liability continues until the requirement is complied with, so that a fresh offence is committed on each occasion of non-compliance. An offence complete on a fixed date is not made continuing by the persistence of its consequences. |
⚠ Why the distinction matters twice over For jurisdiction, under section 198(c): a continuing offence may be tried in any of the local areas in which it continued to be committed. For limitation, under Chapter XXXVI: the period runs from the date of the offence, and in a continuing offence a fresh period begins at every moment during which the offence continues. An offence complete once and for all has one starting point. The test is the same in both contexts: does the liability continue until compliance, or was the offence complete at a moment, with continuing consequences? Consequences that persist do not make an offence continuing. |
3. Act and Consequence, and the Listed Offences
3.1 Sections 199 and 200
Section 199. When an act is an offence by reason of anything which has been done and of a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction either the thing was done or the consequence ensued. The classic illustration is an injury inflicted in one district from which death follows in another: both courts have jurisdiction.
Section 200. Where an act is an offence by reason of its relation to any other act which is also an offence, or which would be an offence if the doer were capable of committing an offence, the first-mentioned offence may be tried by a court within whose jurisdiction either act was done. Abetment is the obvious case, and so is the receiving of stolen property.
3.2 Section 201: the listed offences
Offence | Where it may be tried |
|---|---|
Being a thug, or murder committed by a thug; dacoity; dacoity with murder; belonging to a gang of dacoits; escape from custody | By a Court within whose local jurisdiction the offence was committed, or the accused person is found |
Kidnapping or abduction | By a Court within whose jurisdiction the person was kidnapped or abducted, or was conveyed, concealed or detained |
Theft, extortion or robbery | By a Court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed, or the stolen property was possessed by any person committing it, or by any person who received or retained it knowing or having reason to believe it to be stolen |
Criminal misappropriation or criminal breach of trust | By a Court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed, or any part of the property was received or retained, or was required to be returned or accounted for, by the accused |
Possession of stolen property, knowing it to be stolen | By a Court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed, or the stolen property was possessed by any person who received or retained it knowing or having reason to believe it to be stolen |
The pattern is consistent. In each case the section adds, to the place of commission, the place where the property or the person afterwards went. That is deliberate: in an offence against property the accused is frequently found, and the property recovered, far from the place of the offence, and requiring the trial to be held only there would make the machinery unworkable.
3.3 Section 202: letters and electronic communication
An offence of cheating which includes deception by means of letters or electronic communication may be inquired into or tried by any court within whose local jurisdiction such letters or messages were sent or were received. And an offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property may be tried by a court within whose jurisdiction the property was delivered by the person deceived or was received by the accused person.
⚠ The provision that matters most today Section 202 is, in practice, the provision that decides jurisdiction in the modern offence. A fraud conducted by telephone, e-mail or messaging application is committed nowhere in particular; what can be located is where the message was sent and where it was received, and where the money went. The section gives the complainant a real choice, and it is the answer to the difficulty in Y. Abraham Ajith for a case of this kind: if the deceiving communication was received where the complainant is, that court has jurisdiction, because the receipt is part of the offence and not merely a consequence suffered afterwards. The distinction to hold is between a part of the offence occurring in the place — which confers jurisdiction — and the complainant merely being in the place and suffering the effects — which does not. |
4. Journeys, Joint Trials and Doubt
- Section 203. An offence committed while the person by or against whom, or the thing in respect of which, it was committed was in the course of performing a journey or voyage may be inquired into or tried by a court through or into whose local jurisdiction that person or thing passed in the course of that journey or voyage.
- Section 204. Where offences are triable together under the provisions on joinder of charges, they may be inquired into or tried by any court competent to inquire into or try any of the offences.
- Section 205. The State Government may direct that any cases or class of cases committed for trial in any district may be tried in any sessions division, provided the direction is not repugnant to any direction previously issued by the High Court or the Supreme Court.
- Section 206. Where any doubt arises as to the district in which an inquiry or trial should be held, the High Court decides. Where the courts are in different States, the High Court within whose jurisdiction the proceedings were first commenced decides.
- Section 207. A Magistrate of the first class may issue a summons or warrant for an offence committed beyond the local jurisdiction of his court, and deal with the person as if the offence had been committed within it, subject to the provisions on the transfer of the case.
5. Offences Committed Outside India
Figure 2: Sections 208 and 209
Section 208, BNSS 2023 When an offence is committed outside India — (a) by a citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere; or (b) by a person not being such citizen, on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been committed at any place within India at which he may be found. Provided that no such offence shall be inquired into or tried in India except with the previous sanction of the Central Government. |
Element | Position |
|---|---|
Who is covered | A citizen of India anywhere in the world; and a non-citizen on a ship or aircraft registered in India |
The fiction | The offence is treated as if committed at any place within India at which he may be found. His presence supplies the venue |
The sanction | The previous sanction of the Central Government is a condition of inquiring into or trying the offence. It is jurisdictional: a trial held without it is without authority |
When it must be obtained | Before the inquiry or trial. It is not required for the investigation, which may proceed, but no court may take the matter up without it |
The evidence | Section 209: the Central Government may direct that copies of depositions or exhibits taken or admitted by a court or authority outside India be received as evidence by the court holding the inquiry or trial, where they are not otherwise admissible |
And where the evidence is abroad | Chapter VIII supplies the machinery: a letter of request under section 112 to examine a person or obtain a document abroad, and the evidence so received is deemed to be evidence collected during the investigation |
6. The Consequence of a Defect in Jurisdiction
An objection that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction is frequently taken and less frequently succeeds, for three reasons.
- The chapter gives a choice. In most of the special cases the sections identify more than one competent court, so the objection succeeds only where no part of the offence and no consequence forming part of it occurred within the jurisdiction.
- The investigation is protected. The territorial competence of the investigating officer does not vitiate the investigation, and the remedy where a question arises is transfer rather than nullity.
- Chapter XXXVII governs the trial. Section 511 makes failure of justice the test, and the provisions on irregular proceedings expressly deal with a trial in a wrong place: a finding or sentence is not to be set aside on that ground unless it appears that a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned.
⚠ When the objection does succeed Where no part of the offence occurred within the local area and no consequence forming part of the offence ensued there, the court has no jurisdiction, and the proper course is to return the complaint for presentation to the proper court: Y. Abraham Ajith. The objection should be taken early. It is a question that goes to the competence of the court, and a party who takes it at the conclusion of the trial faces the additional difficulty of showing that a failure of justice has been occasioned. And it is a different objection from the absence of a sanction. Where section 208 applies and the sanction of the Central Government was not obtained, the defect is jurisdictional and the failure-of-justice test does not save the proceeding, because the condition is a condition of the power to try at all. |
7. Key Takeaways
The position stated shortly 1. Section 197: every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. The word “ordinarily” is what allows the special cases that follow. 2. Section 198: where it is uncertain where the offence occurred, where it was committed partly in one area and partly in another, where it is a continuing offence, or where it consists of several acts in different areas — any of the courts concerned may try it. 3. A continuing offence is one whose liability continues until compliance, so that a fresh offence is committed on each occasion. An offence complete on a fixed date is not made continuing by persisting consequences: Deokaran Nenshi. 4. Section 199: where an act is an offence by reason of something done and a consequence ensuing, either court has jurisdiction. 5. Section 201: for kidnapping, theft, extortion, robbery, misappropriation, breach of trust and stolen property, the place of commission and the place where the person or the property afterwards went. 6. Section 202: cheating by letters or electronic communication may be tried where the messages were sent or received; and cheating with delivery of property, where the property was delivered or received. 7. Section 203 covers a journey or voyage; section 204 offences triable together; section 206 gives the High Court the power to decide where there is doubt. 8. Jurisdiction depends on a part of the offence occurring in the place. The complainant merely residing there afterwards and suffering the effects does not confer it: Y. Abraham Ajith. 9. Section 208: an offence committed outside India by a citizen, or by anyone on a ship or aircraft registered in India, may be tried at any place in India where he is found, but only with the previous sanction of the Central Government. 10. A defect in territorial jurisdiction is governed by Chapter XXXVII and the test of failure of justice; the absence of the sanction under section 208 is jurisdictional and is not saved by it. |
8. Frequently Asked Questions
Where is an offence ordinarily tried?
By a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed: section 197. The word “ordinarily” makes this a default, displaced by the special provisions in sections 198 to 204 wherever they apply.
What if the offence was committed in more than one place?
Section 198 permits it to be tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of the areas concerned, where the place is uncertain, where the offence was committed partly in one area and partly in another, where it is a continuing offence, or where it consists of several acts done in different areas.
What is a continuing offence?
One which is susceptible of continuance, arising out of a failure to comply with a requirement, and involving a liability which continues until the requirement is complied with, so that a fresh offence is committed on each occasion of non-compliance: State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi.
Where can an online fraud be tried?
Under section 202, where the letters or electronic communications constituting the deception were sent or were received; and where the offence is cheating with dishonest inducement to deliver property, where the property was delivered by the person deceived or received by the accused.
Can a complainant file wherever she now resides?
No, unless a part of the offence, or a consequence forming part of it, occurred there. Subsequent residence and the suffering of the effects of earlier conduct elsewhere do not confer jurisdiction: Y. Abraham Ajith v. Inspector of Police.
Can an offence committed abroad be tried in India?
Yes, where it was committed by a citizen of India anywhere, or by any person on a ship or aircraft registered in India. He may be dealt with at any place in India where he is found, but the inquiry or trial requires the previous sanction of the Central Government: section 208.
Related Topics
- Conditions Requisite for Initiation of Proceedings: Sections 210 to 222
- Hierarchy of Criminal Courts under the BNSS, 2023
- Powers of Criminal Courts: Sections 21 to 29, BNSS
- Reciprocal Arrangements and Forfeiture: Sections 111 to 124
- Pursuit of Offenders into Other Jurisdictions: Section 45, BNSS
- Irregular Proceedings and the Test of Failure of Justice