This article has been written by Mr. Vivek Toppo , a 3rd year BALLB student of National law University Odisha.

Introduction:-

Cognizable and non-cognizable offences are two categories of criminal offences defined under Indian law. The Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) are the two primary legislations that define and classify criminal offences in India. While cognizable offences are considered more serious and require immediate police intervention, non-cognizable offences are relatively less serious and require the intervention of the court.

Understanding the concept of cognizable and non-cognizable offences:-

In Indian law, offences are classified into two categories: cognizable and non-cognizable offences. The distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences is important because it affects the procedure for registering a complaint, the power of the police to investigate, and the jurisdiction of the court to try the offence.

Section 2 of the Crpc defines cognizable offence, it state that A “cognizable offence” is an offence for which, and a “cognizable case” is a situation in which a police officer may make an arrest without a warrant in accordance with the First Schedule or any other currently in effect statute.

Cognizable offences are those offences in which a police officer can make an arrest without a warrant. The police officer has the power to investigate such offences without any permission from the court. Examples of cognizable offences include murder, rape, robbery, theft, and kidnapping.

On the other hand, non-cognizable offences are defined under section 2(i), they are those offences in which a police officer cannot make an arrest without a warrant. In such cases, the police officer cannot investigate the case without the permission of the court. Examples of non-cognizable offences include assault, defamation, cheating, and public nuisance.

The distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences is based on the gravity of the offence and the level of harm caused to society. Cognizable offences are considered more serious and harmful to society, and therefore, the police have the power to immediately arrest the accused and investigate the case without any court intervention. Non-cognizable offences, on the other hand, are considered relatively less serious and require the intervention of the court before any action can be taken against the accused.

It is important to note that the distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences is not always clear-cut, and there are some offences that fall in a grey area between the two categories. In such cases, the police officer may have to use their discretion to determine whether to register a complaint as a cognizable or non-cognizable offence, based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

A critical assessment of the role of police and courts in dealing with the matters on cognizable and non-cognizable offences:-

The role of police and courts in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences is critical to the effective administration of justice in India. While the police are responsible for the investigation and detection of crimes, the courts are responsible for the trial and adjudication of criminal cases. A critical assessment of the role of police and courts in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences reveals both strengths and weaknesses in the criminal justice system.

Role of Police: The police play a crucial role in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences in India. The police are responsible for investigating the crime, gathering evidence, and arresting the accused. In the case of cognizable offences, the police have the power to arrest the accused without a warrant and start the investigation. This power gives the police a significant advantage in quickly and efficiently dealing with serious crimes.

The police have been criticized for overusing their power to arrest in cognizable offences. In fact, a report by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D) states that “the tendency of the police to arrest accused in all cases needs to be curbed” (Bureau of Police Research and Development, 2018).

Lack of resources and corruption are also significant challenges faced by the police in India. A report by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) states that “lack of resources and corruption in the police force are among the biggest challenges faced by the Indian police” (Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, 2019).

However, the role of the police in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences is not without its challenges. The police often face issues such as political pressure, lack of resources, corruption, and poor training, which can hinder their ability to carry out their duties effectively. The overuse of the power to arrest in cognizable offences and the lack of proper investigation in non-cognizable offences is another challenge faced by the police in India.

Role of Courts: The courts play an equally important role in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences. The courts are responsible for the trial and adjudication of criminal cases, and they play a vital role in ensuring that justice is served. The courts are responsible for interpreting the law and applying it to the facts of the case.

However, the role of the courts in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences is also not without its challenges. The Indian judicial system is often criticized for being slow and overburdened, leading to significant delays in the trial of criminal cases. The high number of pending cases and the shortage of judges and court staff are significant challenges faced by the Indian judiciary.

Initiation proceedings for cognizable offences:-

In India, the initiation of proceedings in a cognizable offence is governed by the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The CrPC provides for the following steps to initiate proceedings in a cognizable offence:

1. Registration of FIR: The first step is the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) with the police. The FIR is a written document that outlines the details of the cognizable offence and is filed by the victim, a witness or any person who has knowledge of the offence. Once an FIR is registered, the police are obligated to investigate the offence.
2. Investigation: The second step is the investigation of the offence by the police. During the investigation, the police will collect evidence, record statements, and gather other information related to the offence.
3. Arrest: If the police have reason to believe that the accused has committed the offence, they may arrest the accused. The CrPC provides guidelines for the arrest of an accused, including the need for a warrant in certain cases.
4. Charge sheet: Once the investigation is complete, the police will submit a charge sheet to the court. The charge sheet contains all the evidence collected during the investigation and outlines the charges against the accused.
5. Trial: The accused is then brought before the court, and the trial begins. The prosecution presents its case, and the accused is given an opportunity to defend themselves. The court will examine the evidence presented by both sides and deliver a verdict based on the evidence.

It is important to note that in a cognizable offence, the police can initiate proceedings without the need for a complaint from the victim. This is because cognizable offences are considered to be more serious crimes and can have a significant impact on public order and safety.

Initiation proceedings for non-cognizable offence:-

In India, the initiation of proceedings in a non-cognizable offence is also governed by the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). However, the procedure for initiating proceedings in a non-cognizable offence is different from that of a cognizable offence. The following are the steps involved in initiating proceedings for a non-cognizable offence:

1. Complaint to the police: The first step in a non-cognizable offence is for the victim or informant to make a complaint to the police. Unlike a cognizable offence, the police cannot initiate an investigation in a non-cognizable offence on their own. The complainant needs to approach the police station and file a complaint.
2. Recording of the complaint: The police will record the complaint in the General Diary (GD) and issue a Non-Cognizable Report (NCR) to the complainant. The NCR will contain the details of the complaint and the action taken by the police.
3. Magistrate’s court: The complainant will then need to approach the Magistrate’s court to initiate proceedings. The Magistrate will examine the complaint and may direct the police to investigate the matter if deemed necessary.
4. Summoning the accused: If the Magistrate finds a prima facie case against the accused, they will issue a summons directing the accused to appear before the court. If the accused fails to appear, the court may issue a warrant for their arrest.
5. Trial: The trial in a non-cognizable offence follows the same procedure as in a cognizable offence. The prosecution presents its case, and the accused is given an opportunity to defend themselves. The court will examine the evidence presented by both sides and deliver a verdict based on the evidence.

It is important to note that in a non-cognizable offence, the police do not have the power to arrest the accused without a warrant. This is because non-cognizable offences are considered less serious and may not have a significant impact on public order and safety.

Landmark cases-

1. State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992): This is a landmark case on the registration of FIR in cognizable offences. The Supreme Court held that an FIR can be registered even on the basis of a complaint, anonymous or hearsay information, or through media reports, provided that there is some verifiable information that a cognizable offence has been committed.
2. Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2013): This is another landmark case on the registration of FIR in cognizable offences. The Supreme Court held that the police are duty-bound to register an FIR in cognizable offences and that failure to do so would be a dereliction of duty. The court also laid down guidelines for the registration of FIR in cognizable offences.
3. State of West Bengal v. Swapan Kumar Guha (1982): This is a landmark case on the procedure for initiation of proceedings in non-cognizable offences. The Supreme Court held that the police have no power to investigate or arrest in non-cognizable offences without a warrant. It also held that a complainant can directly approach the Magistrate’s court for the initiation of proceedings in non-cognizable offences.
4. Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014): This is another landmark case on the procedure for initiation of proceedings in non-cognizable offences. The Supreme Court held that in cases where a complainant approaches the police with a complaint of a non-cognizable offence, the police must record the complaint and issue an NCR. The court also laid down guidelines for the procedure to be followed by the police in non-cognizable offences.

Brief analysis on copyright infringement whether it’s a cognizable offense or not:-

Due to the rapid increase in globalization and technology, there seems to be an increasing rise in the protection of copyright thus protection of copyright has definitely become one of the most important aspect for the protection  of inventions with regards to the issuance of copyright.

According to a report published in March 2009 by United States-India Business Council (USIBC) and prepared by EY India, as much as 250.37165 US$ are lost due to piracy. Alongside, as many as 80,000 jobs were lost directly as a result of theft and piracy, afflicting India’s entertainment industry. 

Copyright infringement is the use of copyright work such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative without the permission of the original owner or the author of the said invention or work. Any person who has been found to copy the work of the author or without the consent of the author is liable to be punished for infringement of copyright. Under section 63 of the copyright Act, 1957 any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of the copyright in any work commits criminal offence.

Copyright infringement offences are punishable by a fine and a year in jail under Section 63 of the Act as originally enacted. However, the Act was altered in 1984 in response to the rising instances of video and music piracy, and the maximum sentence of three years in prison along with the fine was added. Additionally, Section 64 of the Act empowers a police officer to confiscate any copies of the work that are being used in violation of the law without first obtaining a warrant from the offender. 

In Jithendra Prasad Singh v. State of Assam (2003), the High Court ruled that copyright infringement is a non-bailable offence. The Andhra Court, however, disagreed and held that copyright infringement is a bailable and non-cognizable offence.

  In another case of Amarnath Vyas v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2 [2007 CRI LJ 2025 (AP)]. The Court compared the challenged Act provision with its counterpart in the Criminal Procedure Code for its analysis. The Court relied on the conclusions of the former Rajeev Chaudhary and determined that the phrase “punishment for a term which may extend to three years” under the Act is unquestionably distinct from the phrase “punishment for three years and upwards” of the Criminal Procedure Code. 

The key issue in a case recently determined was “Whether the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (the Act) is bailable or non-bailable.” State Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Naresh Kumar Garg 2011(46)PTC114(Del) was decided on March 20, 2013. also in this

The Gauhati High Court decided that the offence under Section 63 of the Act was cognizable and not subject to bail in Jitendra Prasad Singh v. State of Assam 2003 (26) PTC 486 (Gau), which was cited by the court. The court believed that it would be beneficial to refer to Section 64 of the Act, which gives a police officer with at least the level of Sub-Inspector the authority to confiscate copies of any work that are being used in violation of the law. There was no need to specifically give the police officer the authority to seize anything if the crime was non-cognizable and bailable. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, the role of police and courts in dealing with cognizable and non-cognizable offences is critical to the effective administration of justice in India. While the police and courts have made significant contributions to the criminal justice system, they also face significant challenges that need to be addressed to ensure that justice is served. There is a need for police reform, adequate training, and infrastructure, and the need to speed up the judicial process to ensure timely delivery of justice.