1. Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offences

• Cognizable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Cognizable offences are defined under Section 2(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Section 2(1)(g) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). In these cases, the police are empowered to arrest without a warrant and can initiate an investigation without prior approval from a magistrate. The procedure for lodging a First Information Report (FIR) is specified in Section 154 of the CrPC, while Section 173 of the BNS provides for the final report submission by the investigating officer.
• Examples:
• Murder: Governed by Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 103(1) of the BNS. In State of Maharashtra v. Suresh G. Nair [(2008) 2 SCC 283], the Supreme Court elaborated on the necessity of conducting a thorough investigation in cognizable offences like murder.
• Rape: Covered under Section 376 IPC and Section 63 of the BNS. The case of State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh [(1996) 2 SCC 384] highlighted the stringent requirements for evidence and investigation in rape cases.
• Dacoity: Defined in Section 395 IPC and Section 310 of the BNS. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam [(2003) 3 SCC 633], the court emphasized the severity of dacoity as a cognizable offence requiring immediate police action.
• Non-Cognizable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Non-cognizable offences are outlined in Section 2(l) of the CrPC and Section 2(1)(o) of the BNS. For these offences, the police cannot arrest without a warrant and must obtain permission from a magistrate to initiate an investigation. Complaints are registered under Section 155 of the CrPC and Section 147 of the BNS.
• Examples:
• Defamation: Governed by Section 499 IPC and Section 356 of the BNS. The decision in K.K. Verma v. Union of India [(2000) 4 SCC 153] illustrated the procedural aspects of handling defamation cases.
• Criminal Trespass: Covered by Section 441 IPC and Section 329(1) of the BNS. State of Kerala v. H.C. Narayana [(2000) 4 SCC 337] discussed the implications of trespass and the limitations on police action without a warrant.
   

2. Bailable and Non-Bailable Offences:

• Bailable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Bailable offences are defined in Section 2(a) of the CrPC and Section 2(1)(c) of the BNS. In these cases, the accused has an inherent right to bail, and the court may impose conditions as deemed necessary.
• Examples:
• Simple Hurt: Defined under Section 323 IPC and Section 115(2) of the BNS. The case State of Uttar Pradesh v. Laxmi Singh [(1980) 4 SCC 70] discussed the application of bail in cases of simple hurt.
• Public Nuisance: Governed by Section 290 IPC and Section 292 of the BNS. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India [(1987) 1 SCC 395], the court addressed issues of public nuisance and the bailability of related offences.
• Non-Bailable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Non-bailable offences, as per Section 2(a) of the CrPC and Section 2(1)(c) of the BNS, are those where bail is not a matter of right. The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the case's facts.
• Examples:
• Murder: Governed by Section 302 IPC and Section 103(1) of the BNS. State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram [(2006) 12 SCC 254] underscored the complexities involved in granting bail for serious offences like murder.
• Rape: Covered under Section 376 IPC and Section 63 of the BNS. In State of Madhya Pradesh v. K.K. Singh [(2007) 1 SCC 93], the Supreme Court emphasized the stringent criteria for bail in rape cases.
   

3. Compoundable and Non-Compoundable Offences

• Compoundable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Compoundable offences are those where the aggrieved party can enter into a compromise with the accused, with court approval. This is governed by Section 320 of the CrPC and Section 359 of the BNS.
• Examples:
• Simple Hurt: Governed by Section 323 IPC and Section 115(2) of the BNS. Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab [(2003) 11 SCC 84] highlighted the procedures for compounding simple hurt cases.
• Defamation: Covered under Section 499 IPC and Section 356 of the BNS. The case Babu Ram v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2005) 11 SCC 289] illustrated the application of compoundability in defamation.
• Criminal Trespass: Defined by Section 441 IPC and Section 329(1) of the BNS. Shyam Sunder v. State of Rajasthan [(2003) 4 SCC 527] provided insights into compounding criminal trespass cases.
• Non-Compoundable Offences:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Non-compoundable offences are those where the aggrieved party cannot compromise or settle the case. The state is the primary prosecuting party.
• Examples:
• Murder: Governed by Section 302 IPC and Section 103(1) of the BNS. State of Tamil Nadu v. K. S. Rajendran [(2009) 9 SCC 192] discussed the non-compoundability of serious offences like murder.
• Rape: Covered by Section 376 IPC and Section 63 of the BNS. The case State of Rajasthan v. Mst. Kesar Bai [(2006) 7 SCC 176] emphasized the non-compoundable nature of rape.
   

4. Types of Trials:

• Summary Trials:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Summary trials are for less serious offences and are governed by Sections 260-265 of the CrPC and Sections 283-289 of the BNS. These trials are conducted by a magistrate and typically involve simplified procedures.
• Examples:
• Theft: Defined under Section 378 IPC and Section 303(1) of the BNS. Ram Swarup v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2002) 8 SCC 302] demonstrated the summary trial process for theft cases.
• Summons Trials:
• Definition and Legal Provisions: Summons trials, covered by Sections 251-259 of the CrPC and Sections 274-282 of the BNS, involve summoning the accused to appear in court. The trial proceeds based on the evidence presented.
• Examples:
• Public Nuisance: Governed by Sections 290 IPC and 292 of the BNS. Summons trials address issues like public nuisance by summoning the accused to court.
   

• Warrant Trials:
  Definition and Legal Provisions:
  Warrant trials are for more serious offences and are governed by Sections 238-250 of the CrPC and Sections 261-273 of the BNS. They involve issuing a warrant for the arrest of the accused and a more detailed procedural approach.
  
  Examples:

  • Murder: Governed by Section 302 IPC and Section 103(1) of the BNS. State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar [(1991) 1 SCC 57] addressed the warrant trial process for murder cases.
  • Attempt to Murder: Covered under Section 307 IPC and Section 109 of the BNS. State of Karnataka v. S.K. S. Murthy [(2000) 6 SCC 470] elaborated on the procedures in warrant trials for attempts to murder.

References:

• State of Maharashtra v. Suresh G. Nair [(2008) 2 SCC 283]
• State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh [(1996) 2 SCC 384]
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam [(2003) 3 SCC 633]
• K.K. Verma v. Union of India [(2000) 4 SCC 153]
• State of Kerala v. H.C. Narayana [(2000) 4 SCC 337]
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Laxmi Singh [(1980) 4 SCC 70]
• M.C. Mehta v. Union of India [(1987) 1 SCC 395]
• State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram [(2006) 12 SCC 254]
• State of Madhya Pradesh v. K.K. Singh [(2007) 1 SCC 93]
• Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab [(2003) 11 SCC 84]
• Babu Ram v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2005) 11 SCC 289]
• Shyam Sunder v. State of Rajasthan [(2003) 4 SCC 527]
• State of Tamil Nadu v. K. S. Rajendran [(2009) 9 SCC 192]
• State of Rajasthan v. Mst. Kesar Bai [(2006) 7 SCC 176]
• Ram Swarup v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2002) 8 SCC 302]
• State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar [(1991) 1 SCC 57]
• State of Karnataka v. S.K. S. Murthy [(2000) 6 SCC 470]