Introduction
The classification of offences into cognizable and non-cognizable offences forms a foundational pillar of India’s criminal justice system. The newly enacted Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which replaces the decades-old Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, retains this critical distinction. This classification ensures a balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of individual rights and liberties. A clear understanding of this distinction is essential for legal practitioners, law enforcement personnel, and the general public alike.
Legal Definitions of Cognizable and Non-Cognizable offences
As per the BNSS, a cognizable offence refers to a situation where police can arrest without a warrant and begin an investigation without prior approval from a Magistrate. Conversely, non-cognizable offences require the police to obtain permission from a Magistrate before initiating any investigation or making an arrest.
The First Schedule of the BNSS lays out specific offences classified under both categories, primarily based on the severity and social impact of the act.
Nature and Gravity of Offences
Cognizable offences are more serious in nature and typically include crimes that threaten public order or cause significant harm to individuals. These include:
- Murder
- Rape
- Kidnapping
- Robbery
- Dowry Death
Such offences generally attract penalties exceeding three years of imprisonment, and in some cases, life imprisonment or the death penalty.
In contrast, non-cognizable offences are less severe and often involve minor disputes or harm. Examples include:
- Defamation
- Public nuisance
- Simple hurt
- Forgery
These typically carry punishments up to three years or fines.
Procedural Differences under the BNSS
| Aspect | Cognizable Offence | Non-Cognizable Offence |
| Arrest | Without warrant | Only with Magistrate’s permission |
| Investigation | Initiated by police without prior Magistrate approval | Requires Magistrate’s permission to initiate |
| FIR Registration | Mandatory | Only after Magistrate’s direction |
| Police Powers | Immediate and autonomous | Restricted; involves judicial supervision |
| Examples | Murder, Rape, Robbery | Cheating, Defamation, Public nuisance |
Notably, the BNSS introduces a 14-day preliminary enquiry for offences punishable between three to seven years, to be conducted before registering an FIR. This aims to curb misuse of police powers and reduce the number of false cases.
Judicial Interpretations and Legal Reforms
In the landmark case of Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court held that FIR registration in cognizable offences is mandatory and not at the discretion of the police. However, the BNSS now permits preliminary inquiries in certain cases before FIR registration, which may raise constitutional concerns.
Further, in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, the Court laid down detailed guidelines on arrests and custodial rights, especially relevant to cognizable cases. The decision in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar also stressed the importance of proportionality and judicial oversight in arrest procedures, particularly for offences punishable under seven years.
Practical Implications
The classification has significant implications on the ground:
- FIR Filing: In cognizable cases, an FIR must be registered promptly. Delay may compromise evidence or weaken the case.
- Police Autonomy: The power to act swiftly in cognizable matters enables effective policing, but unchecked powers can lead to misuse.
- Access to Justice: Victims of non-cognizable offences often face delays due to the requirement of Magistrate approval.
- Classification Dilemmas: Some offences, such as cheating or criminal breach of trust, can fall into grey areas depending on the facts of the case.
Digital Reforms and Contemporary Relevance
the BNSS, while largely retaining the CrPC framework, introduces critical improvements to procedural timelines and police accountability. It offers a more structured approach to investigation and arrest, especially in minor offences.
More over,points out that the BNSS incorporates digital tools such as e-FIRs, video conferencing for hearings, and online delivery of summons, making criminal procedure more efficient and accessible. However, it carefully maintains the distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences to uphold due process and prevent arbitrary action.
Conclusion
The cognizable vs non-cognizable classification under the BNSS, 2023 continues to be a cornerstone of India’s criminal procedure. While it empowers the police to respond swiftly to serious offences, it also mandates judicial oversight in less severe cases to prevent abuse of power. With the addition of technological reforms and procedural safeguards, the BNSS aims to create a more balanced, fair, and efficient criminal justice system. Its success will depend not just on the written law, but on its interpretation, implementation, and public awareness.
About Author
Bhagvati, a law student at the Faculty of Law, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. Passionate about Constitutional Law, Criminal Justice, and Women & Child Rights, she explores evolving legal issues through writing, research, and creative expression.
References
Bare act,Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1.
LawBhoomi, “Difference Between Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offences”, https://lawbhoomi.com/difference-between-cognizable-and-non-cognizable-offences-in-india/
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) 1 SCC 416.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273.
Ibid., LawBhoomi.
iPleaders, “Difference Between Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offences”, https://blog.ipleaders.in/difference-between-cognizable-and-non-cognizable-offences/
MyJudix, “Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offences under BNSS”, https://www.myjudix.com/post/cognizable-and-non-cognizable-offences-under-bnss-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita