Jurisdictional Flexibility and Resolving Court Conflicts under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Jurisdictional Adaptability and Settling Court Disputes under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which substituted the Criminal Procedure Code, has made several provisions that seek to make criminal trials in courts more efficient. Two of the most important sections of the new legislation, Section 205 and Section 206, deal with the state government’s jurisdictional powers as well as how disputes between courts are settled in the case of the same offence being taken cognizance of by the courts.

Section 205: State Government’s Power to Direct Trial in Any District

Section 205 of the BNSS gives discretionary powers to the State Government to order that any case or class of cases committed for trial in a specific district can be transferred and tried in any other sessions division of the state. This power is given to provide administrative flexibility in the disposal of cases and to meet any particular local problem that may emerge.

Key Points:

The State Government can also issue a direction for the relocation of the trial of cases to another sessions division of the state.

This power is not, however, absolute. It is subject to any existing orders of the High Court or the Supreme Court. Any direction made by the state government should not go against a directive from a superior court, e.g., the High Court or the Supreme Court.

For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )

The direction of the State Government itself has to abide by the laws prevailing then.

Example:

Consider a case involving a celebrity in a district where it may be difficult to conduct an impartial trial due to pressures there. The State Government can transfer the case to another sessions division for trial. But if the High Court has already issued an order on the case jurisdiction, the State Government cannot go against it.

Section 206: Resolving Conflicts Between Multiple Courts Taking Cognizance of the Same Offence

Section 206 addresses situations where two or more courts have taken cognizance of the same offence, creating a jurisdictional conflict. This section provides a mechanism to resolve such conflicts by involving the High Court that has appellate jurisdiction over the case.

Key Points:

When two or more courts of the same state take cognizance of the same offense, the High Court having the appellate jurisdiction of those courts shall determine which of the courts is to investigate into or try the offense.

If the courts are in different states and belong to different High Courts, the High Court where proceedings originally commenced will settle the difference.

After the decision is taken by the concerned High Court, all other proceedings in the rival courts will be suspended.

Example:

Suppose a fraud case has been instituted in two district courts of the same state. Both courts assume jurisdiction over the case, and this creates a conflict. The High Court to which both the district courts are subordinate will determine which of the two will proceed with the trial. Once this determination is made, the proceedings in the other court will be stopped to prevent duplication of work.

In the second case, if a crime is committed across two states and both states’ courts have taken cognizance of the same offense, then the High Court where the case was originally filed will decide which court should conduct the trial.

Relation to Previous Sections of BNSS

The requirements of Sections 205 and 206 apply to previous provisions in the BNSS, notably those regarding courts’ jurisdiction (for instance, Sections 197 to 204). For instance, Section 204 provides that a number of offences can be tried together in a single trial, whereas Section 206 sets out which court would have preference should more than one court have taken cognizance of an identical offence.

For further insight into the previous provisions and their interplay with Sections 205 and 206, see the discussions on Sections 197 to 204 above. Alternatively, see in-depth articles in Live Law Hindi for a detailed analysis of these sections.

Conclusion

Sections 205 and 206 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, offer critical guidelines for handling jurisdictional flexibility and court conflicts. While Section 205 authorizes the State Government to re-transfer cases between sessions divisions on administrative grounds, Section 206 provides a transparent mechanism for resolving conflicts when more than one court takes cognizance of the same offence. These provisions facilitate a smooth criminal justice system and obviate unnecessary duplication of efforts in the judicial process. The high courts have a vital function to ensure that jurisdictional disputes are solved equitably and efficiently.