Section 210 BNSS: Cognizance of offences by Magistrate (Formerly Section 190 CrPC)

Section 210 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Cognizance of offences by Magistrate

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any Magistrate of the first class, and any Magistrate of the second class specially empowered in this behalf under sub-section (2), may take cognizance of any offence—

(a) upon receiving a complaint of facts, including any complaint filed by a person authorised under any special law, which constitutes such offence;

(b) upon a police report (submitted in any mode including electronic mode) of such facts;

(c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed.

(2) The Chief Judicial Magistrate may empower any Magistrate of the second class to take cognizance under sub-section (1) of such offences as are within his competence to inquire into or try.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Complaint Sec 2(1)(d) Police Report Sec 2(1)(p)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 210

Section 210 of the BNSS, 2023 empowers a Magistrate of the first class, or specially empowered Magistrate of the second class, to take cognizance of any offence upon a police report, private complaint, information, or suo motu knowledge (replacing Section 190 CrPC).

Three Modes of Cognizance: Takes cognizance upon: (1) police report (charge sheet); (2) private complaint of facts; or (3) information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon own knowledge.
Cognizance of Offence, Not Offender: Cognizance is taken of the offence, not the individual offender; subsequent inclusion of non-charge-sheeted persons is legally valid.
Judicial Application of Mind: Requires conscious application of mind to determine whether facts constitute an offence.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Tula Ram v. Kishore Singh (1977) 4 SCC 459: The Supreme Court settled that taking cognizance is a judicial act involving application of mind to the facts with a view to proceeding under subsequent provisions of the Code.
Nupur Talwar v. CBI (2012) 11 SCC 465: The Supreme Court held that the Magistrate is not bound by the police closure report; upon applying mind, the Magistrate can disagree with the police and take cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC (Section 210(1)(b) BNSS).
Naharlakshmi v. State of U.P. (2010) 12 SCC 324: Reaffirmed that cognizance is taken of the crime, empowering the court to summon any person who appears from the material to be involved.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Linchpin principle under *Nupur Talwar*: When police file a closure report ('untraced' or 'cancellation'), the informant should file a Protest Petition. The magistrate is fully empowered under Section 210(1)(a)/(b) to reject the closure report and issue process against the accused.