Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases
(2014) 2 SCC 532 · Supreme Court of India
Limitation for a criminal complaint is computed from the date of filing, not from the later date of cognizance.
Unit IV · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Juvenile Justice and Probation
Cognizance of offences: BNSS 210, 223 / CrPC 190, 200
Study aid only. Confirm statute numbers with the current bare Act and the official OU LL.B. (3-YDC) 2024–25 syllabus PDF.
Statute sections
| Act / instrument | Section | Name |
|---|---|---|
| Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 | 210 | Cognizance of offences by magistrates (cf. s. 190 CrPC) |
| Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 | 223 | Examination of complainant (cf. s. 200 CrPC) |
| Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 | 4 | Punishments — context for cognizable/non-cognizable classification |
Landmark cases
A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak
AIR 1984 SC 718 · Supreme Court of India
Anyone can set the criminal law in motion by a complaint unless the statute confines locus to a specified person.
Kishun Singh v. State of Bihar
(1993) 2 SCC 16 · Supreme Court of India
A sessions court can summon additional accused when cognizance has been taken on a police report, if evidence discloses their involvement.