Skip to main content

Role of Police in Cognizable Offences and Non-Cognizable Offen

 Role of Police in Cognizable Offences and Non-Cognizable Offences

By Shagun Mahendroo

What is the difference between a cognizable and a non-cognizable crime?

  • A cognizable offence is one in which the police take cognizance of a crime on their own initiative and without the requirement for court approval. In non-cognizable, police have no jurisdiction to arrest a person for a crime without first obtaining judicial consent.

  • The police can arrest someone without a warrant if they are cognizable. In the case of a non-cognizable offence, a warrant is required for arrest.

  • A court order is not required to begin an investigation in cognizable. In the case of a non-cognizable offence, however, a court order is required before an inquiry can begin.

  • Major crimes that are cognizable are the most serious, whereas non-cognizable offences are less serious.

  • Murder, rape, theft, kidnapping, counterfeiting, and other crimes are all considered cognizable. Non-cognizable offences, on the other hand, include forgery, cheating, assault, defamation, and so on.

  • One can submit a FIR or make a complaint to the magistrate for a cognizable offence. In contrast, in the instance of a non-cognizable offence, the only recourse is to file a complaint with the magistrate.

A cognizable offence is one for which a police officer can make an arrest without a warrant or without the approval of a magistrate under the terms of a first schedule or any other law in effect at the time. Rape, Murder, Dowry Death, Kidnapping, Theft, Criminal Breach of Trust, Waging or attempting to wage war or abetting the waging of war against the Indian government are examples of cognizable offences.

When these types of offences are committed, a police officer has the authority to make an arrest right away. Before filing a FIR, he can undertake a preliminary investigation. Police can also make an arrest and bring the suspect before a magistrate. The Supreme Court of India declared in Lalita kumarai v Government of U.P. that the police must compulsorily register the FIR upon receiving a complainant if the information discloses a cognizable offence, and that no prior investigation is permitted in such a case. Any magistrate authorised under Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code can instruct a police officer in charge of a police station to investigate charges, according to Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

 If an investigation is not completed within 24 hours, it may be prosecuted under Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code. A maximum of 15 days in police custody is allowed. This is known as police custody, and if reasonable grounds are established, detention should not exceed 90 days for only the most serious crimes punishable by death, life imprisonment, or ten years in jail, and detention should not exceed 60 days for all other offences.

According to section 2(l), a non-cognizable offence is one for which a police officer does not have the right to arrest without a warrant. Without a warrant, a police officer cannot arrest the suspect or initiate an inquiry. The police officer in charge should seek an order from the magistrate under section 155(2). Non-cognizable offences include assault, forgery, cheating, defamation, and public annoyance, among others. For making an arrest in such cases, the following stages must be completed: filing of a complaint, investigation, charge sheet, charge sheet to be filed in court, and trial.

To begin an investigation, the aggrieved party must file a complaint with the appropriate police station. The police officer is responsible for filing the charge sheet in court once the investigation is completed. After the trial, the court will give orders for the issuance of a warrant to arrest the accused, which the police officer must gather in the form of paperwork.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre
Post a Comment
Read more

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected
Post a Comment
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct
Post a Comment
Read more