Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the first proviso to Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 requiring an opportunity of hearing to the accused before cognizance would apply to the complaint proceedings that had already commenced before the Sanhita came into force, having regard to Section 531(2)(a) saving pending proceedings.
Analysis: The proviso to Section 223 contemplates hearing of the accused before cognizance, but Section 531(2)(a) preserves pending appeals, applications, trials, inquiries and investigations by requiring them to continue under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 if they were pending immediately before the commencement of the new Sanhita. On the facts found, the proceedings against the revisionist had been initiated, and the complaint had been filed, before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force. In that situation, the cognizance order was to be tested under the earlier procedural regime, and the new proviso was held inapplicable.
Conclusion: The challenge to cognizance failed and the revision was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Where proceedings were already pending before the commencement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 531(2)(a) saves the earlier procedural law and the proviso to Section 223 does not govern cognizance in such pending matters.