Taking cognizance

Solution

This answer is based on the fundamental legal principle enshrined in Section 223 of the BNSS (which corresponds to Section 190 of the old CrPC). 1. The Statutory Wording (Section 223 BNSS) Section 223 explicitly states: "Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any Magistrate of the first class... may take cognizance of any offence ..." The section lists the modes by which this cognizance is taken (upon receiving a complaint, a police report, or information from another person). Crucially, the text always refers to the "offence." 2. The Legal Principle: Offence vs. Offender It is a settled position of law (established in landmark judgments like Raghubans Dubey v. State of Bihar, which remains applicable under the new code) that cognizance is taken of the crime, not the criminal.

• Focus on the Act: When a Magistrate applies their judicial mind, they are looking at the facts to determine if a crime (offence) has been committed.
• Irrelevance of Specific Suspects at this Stage: Even if the police report lists Person A as the accused, but the Magistrate finds evidence against Person B, the Magistrate can proceed against Person B. This is only possible because they have taken cognizance of the entire offence, regardless of who strictly is named as the offender at that moment.

3. Why other options are incorrect:

• "Cognizance of the offenders": Incorrect because the Magistrate can proceed against offenders not originally named if the evidence points to them later. If cognizance were limited to the "offender," the Magistrate would be restricted only to the specific people named initially.
• "Cognizance of the deceased": Legally irrelevant in this context.

Summary   New BNSS Procedural Safeguard: Pre-Cognizance Notice However, an important distinction must be noted. Section 223 of the BNSS (relating to the procedure for taking cognizance on complaints) introduces a procedural safeguard absent in the old CrPC: "Provided that no cognizance of an offence shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard." This provision requires the magistrate to: 1.      Examine the complainant and witnesses on oath before taking cognizance 2.      Issue notice to the accused before cognizance is formally taken 3.      Allow the accused to submit a defensive case (not a full trial, but a meaningful hearing) 4.      Only then take cognizance after considering all submissions This procedural safeguard does NOT alter the substantive principle that cognizance is of the offence, not the offender. It merely adds a pre-cognizance hearing requirement.