Section 200 CrPC: Examination of complainant

Chapter XV

cognizance, complaint, examination, Magistrate, preliminary inquiry, procedure, Public Servant, Transfer of case

New Law Update (2024)

Section 216 BNSS

TRIAL COURT

Magistrate's Court

Punishment

Procedural – Investigation / Inquiry

Cognizable?

Bailable?

Compoundable?

Bare Act Text

Provided that, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses—
(a) if a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint; or
(b) if the Magistrate makes over the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under Section 192:
Provided further that if the Magistrate makes over the case to another Magistrate under Section 192 after examining the complainant and the witnesses, the latter Magistrate need not re-examine them.

Important Sub-Sections Explained

First Proviso (a) & (b)

These clauses provide specific exceptions to the general rule requiring a Magistrate to examine the complainant under oath. Examination is not mandatory if the complaint originates from a public servant acting in their official capacity or from a Court, or if the Magistrate immediately transfers the case to another Magistrate under Section 192.

Second Proviso

This proviso ensures judicial efficiency by stating that if a Magistrate has already conducted the examination of the complainant and witnesses, and subsequently transfers the case under Section 192, the receiving Magistrate is not required to re-examine them.

Landmark Judgements

Pramatha Nath Talukdar v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar (1962):

This Supreme Court case clarified that the inquiry under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC is not a trial but a preliminary step to determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused, thereby preventing frivolous complaints.

Rosy v. State of Kerala (2000):

The Supreme Court reiterated that the examination of the complainant under Section 200 is mandatory. It also held that while non-examination is an irregularity, it may not vitiate the entire proceedings if no prejudice is caused to the accused, emphasizing the essence of natural justice.

Chapter XV