Chapter XV
Section 202 CrPC: Postponement of issue of process
New Law Update (2024)
Section 236 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Court of Sessions
Punishment
Procedural – Warrant / Summons Process
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit and shall in a case where the accused is residing at a place beyond the area in which he exercises his jurisdiction, postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding:
Provided that no such direction for investigation shall be made—
(a) where it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session; or
(b) where the complaint has not been made by a Court, unless the complainant and the witnesses present (if any) have been examined on oath under section 200.
(2) In an inquiry under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, take evidence of witnesses on oath:
Provided that if it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall call upon the complainant to produce all his witnesses and examine them on oath.
(3) If an investigation under sub-section (1) is made by a person not being a police officer, he shall have for that investigation all the powers conferred by this Code on an officer in charge of a police station except the power to arrest without warrant.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 202(1) CrPC
This crucial sub-section empowers a Magistrate to postpone issuing summons or warrants against an accused and instead conduct an inquiry or direct an investigation. This is mandatory if the accused lives outside the Magistrate’s jurisdiction, ensuring that only cases with genuine grounds proceed, thereby preventing unnecessary harassment.
Landmark Judgements
Mehmood Ul Rehman v. State of MP (2007):
The Supreme Court clarified the scope of inquiry under Section 202, emphasizing that the Magistrate must apply his mind to determine if there are sufficient grounds for proceeding, and the object is to prevent harassment to an innocent person from an ill-founded complaint.
Shivjee Singh v. Nagendra Tiwary (2010):
The Supreme Court reiterated that the inquiry under Section 202 is to ascertain whether a prima facie case is made out against the accused for issuing process, and it is not meant for detailed scrutiny of evidence as if it were a trial.