RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
TOPIC- VARIOUS KINDS OF JURISDICTIONS UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
SUB-TOPIC- TERRITORIAL AND EXTRA-TERRITORIAL
JURISDICTIONS
SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY:
PROF. IVNEET WALIA SHAURYA ARON
PROF. SHARANJIT KAUR 16132, [Link]
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TERRITORIAL AND EXTRA- TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
1860..........................................................................................................................................2
INTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE INDIAN CRIMINAL COURTS..........................4
FOREIGNER.......................................................................................................................................4
CORPORATIONS................................................................................................................................4
HIGH SEAS........................................................................................................................................5
EXCEPTIONS TO THE INTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.................................................................6
EVERY PERSON.................................................................................................................................7
MOBARIK ALI V. STATE OF BOMBAY...............................................................................................7
ESOP’S CASE.................................................................................................................................7
EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.................................................................................................8
PROVISIONS RELATED WITH “EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF CRPC”.................................8
CRIMES COMMITTED OUTSIDE INDIA...............................................................................................9
EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF CRPC................................................................................10
OFFENCES COMMITTED ON LAND..................................................................................................10
OFFENCES COMMITTED ON SHIP.....................................................................................................10
COMMITTED ON AIRCRAFT.............................................................................................................11
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY INDIAN CITIZENS BEYOND INDIA........................................................11
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY FOREIGNERS IN INDIA..........................................................................12
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY FOREIGNERS OUTSIDE INDIA...............................................................12
SANCTION UNDER SECTION 188.....................................................................................................13
WHICH COURT CAN TRY SUCH OFFENCES....................................................................................13
CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................................15
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 1|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
TERRITORIAL AND EXTRA- TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION UNDER THE
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
Jurisdiction may be defined as power or authority of a court to hear and determine a case, to
adjudicate and exercise any judicial power in relation to it by taking cognizance of matters
presented before the court.1
There are two kinds of jurisdiction of courts-
a) inherent jurisdiction,
b) local jurisdiction.
By want of inherent jurisdiction, it is meant that the court is not empowered to try the case. The
local jurisdiction means the limit of the area in which the court can exercise its power. 2 The lex
fori or law of jurisdiction controls all matters pertaining to remedial as distinguished from
substantive rights. If question of jurisdiction is raised the trial can be commenced after deciding
that question.3
Territorial Jurisdiction or local jurisdiction is provided just as a matter of convenience, keeping
in mind the administrative point of view with respect to the work of a particular court, the
convenience of the witnesses who have to appear before the court. 4 Under the English Law, 'all
crimes are local' and are triable at the common law by the courts within whose jurisdiction they
are committed.5
Section 2 of the Indian Penal Code deal with the intra-territorial jurisdiction and section 3 & 4
1
Ujjam Bai vs Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1962 SC 1621.
2
The Code of Criminal Procedure, Batuk Lal, 2nd ed., p. 291.
3
The Code of Criminal Procedure, Dr. N.V. Paranjape, 3rd ed., p. 212.
4
Janardan Reddy v. State of Hydrabad, AIR 1951 SC 217.
5
Abraham v. Inspector of Police, AIR 2004 SC 4286.
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 2|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
deals with Extra-territorial jurisdiction.
In Cr.P.C, the basic rule is reflected in Section 177 which reads that proper and ordinary venue
for trial of a crime is the area of jurisdiction in which, on the evidence, the facts occur and which
are alleged to constitute the crime. 6 The word "ordinarily"7, however, suggests that certain
exceptions are implicit and they are not limited to these specially provided in the CRPC. Specific
Exceptions have been laid down in Sections 179 to 185 and 188.8
6
Narumal v. State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 1329
7
Section 177 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
8
TAKWANI CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 3rd ed., p. 110
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 3|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
INTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE INDIAN CRIMINAL COURTS
As per Section 2 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the, intra-territorial jurisdiction-
every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or
omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India.
The words “Every person” clearly say that subject to the General Exceptions (Chapter-IV), every
person, irrespective of his caste, region, religion, etc., shall be punished, if he is proved guilty
under the provisions of this Code.
FOREIGNER
A foreigner, who is a guilty of any offence under this Code, shall be punishable under this Code,
if he has committed any offence in India, although the alleged offence might have not been an
offence in his motherland.
In State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George9, a German National left Zurich for Manila by a
Swiss Plane with 34 Kilos of gold. He had not declared it in the manifest for transit. The plane
arrived at Bombay. The passenger had remained in the plane. The Indian custom authorities, on
search, recovered the gold carried by him on his person. He was prosecuted for importing gold
into India under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.
CORPORATIONS
A company is liable to be persecuted and punished for criminal offenses. Although there are
earlier authorities to the fact that the corporation can not commit a crime, the generally accepted
modern rule is that a corporation may be subject to indictment and other criminal process
although the criminal act may be committed through its agent.
9
1965 (1) SCR 123: AIR 1965 SC 722: 1965 (1) CrLJ)
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 4|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
However, a corporation can’t be imposed corporal punishments for the offences which can be
committed by human beings only, viz., murder, treason, perjury, etc.
“WITHIN INDIA”
The expression “within India” 10 in section 2 of the IPC points out towards the intra-territorial
jurisdiction of the Indian Penal Code. This includes the whole land territory of India, the
maritime belt of India which presently extends up to twelve nautical miles in the sea, the whole
air space over and the area underneath this total area. The maritime belt, which is also known as
territorial waters, is measured from the appropriate base line.
The Indian Parliament has kept itself abreast with the latest development in the field of
international law and has enacted the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic
Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976 Section 3 (2) of which has extended the territorial
waters of India to twelve nautical miles.
In 1977 the Exclusive Economic Zone has also been extended to two hundred nautical miles. If
any offence relating to property is committed within this zone, the Indian criminal jurisdiction
will naturally extend to it.
HIGH SEAS
High seas are open to all, and represent the entire sea-space beyond the three miles’ limit of the
shore. This expression includes all ocean seas, bays, channels, rivers, creeks and waters below
low water-mark, and where great ships could go, with the exception only of such parts of such
ocean and as were within the territory of some country.
10
Sec 2 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 5|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
EXCEPTIONS TO THE INTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Section 2 of the IPC mentions “every person” within India. However, there are certain persons
exempted from the jurisdiction of Criminal Courts. These persons are given certain rights,
privileges, etc. This is the same position in other countries also. Such persons are:
Foreign Sovereigns: Foreign Sovereigns are the persons completely exempted from the
jurisdiction of the Indian Criminal Courts. Since a sovereign is the highest authority of his
nation, he is not amenable to the jurisdiction of other countries. He is totally independent and
represents the dignity of his country.
Ambassadors: Certain immunities and privileges have been granted to Ambassadors of other
countries by the Diplomatic Privileges Act, 1964 of England, the United Nations (Privileges and
Immunities) Act, 1947 (Act No. XLV of 1947) of India, etc., are examples. Therefore,
Ambassadors are exempted from the jurisdiction of the Indian Criminal Courts.
Alien Enemies: The military persons of alien enemies do not come under the jurisdiction of
ordinary Criminal Courts, for the acts done connecting with the war. However, if they commit
theft, robbery, rape, etc., unconnected with war, they shall be tried by the Indian Criminal
Courts.
Warships: The warships entered into the Indian Sea waters cannot be tried under the ordinary
Indian Criminal Courts. The Public International Law applies to such men-of-war.
President and Governors: The President of India and the Governors of the States are exempted
from the jurisdiction of the Criminal Courts, by Article 361 of the Indian Constitution.
Foreign army: The Foreign army personnel entered into the Indian territories with the
permission of the Indian Government is exempted from the jurisdiction of the criminal
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 6|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
courts. There are many instances when a foreign army is based on the soil of another country
with the consent of the host country.
EVERY PERSON
This provision subjects every person to punishment under this Code who violates any provision
of the Code by his act or omission of which he shall be guilty within India. The use of the
expression ‘every person’ in this section and not ‘any person’ as in sections 3 and 4 (2) is
deliberate. No distinction has been made of nation, rank, caste or creed of the person and
whoever violates any provision is liable to punishment. A foreign national committing an offence
within India can be punished.
MOBARIK ALI V. STATE OF BOMBAY
In the famous case of Mobarik Ali v. State of Bombay a national of Pakistan made certain false
representations from Karachi by letters, telegrams and telephones to the complainant at Bombay
on the belief of which the complainant paid a certain amount of money to the agent of the
Pakistani at Bombay.
The Supreme Court held that the Pakistani national was subject to the jurisdiction of the Indian
Courts for having committed the offence of cheating and as the appellant had already
surrendered to the authorities of India under the provisions of the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881
in connection with another case, his conviction was valid under section 420, Indian Penal Code.
ESOP’S CASE
In the Esop’s case a foreigner had committed an unnatural offence on an Indian ship lying in St.
Katherine’s Docks. His defence that he was a foreigner and that in his country such an act was
not an offence was rejected on the ground that the act was an offence under the Indian Penal
Code and that it was committed on an Indian ship which was Indian Territory.
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 7|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Sections 3 and 4 of the IPC deals with the extra-territorial operation of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 3 provides for the punishment of offences committed beyond, but which by law
may be tried within India: Any person liable, by any Indian law, to be tried for an
offence committed beyond India shall be dealt with according to the provisions of this
Code for any act committed beyond India in the same manner as if such act had been
committed within India.
Section 4 of the IPC is an Extension of Code to extra-territorial offences. It applies to –
Any citizen of India in any place of the world.
Any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India wherever it may be.
any person in any place without and beyond India committing offence targeting a
computer resource located in India
In this Section the word “offence” includes every act committed outside India which, if
committed in India, would be punishable under this Code.
A, who is a citizen of India, commits a murder in Australia. He can be tried and convicted of
murder in any place in India in which he may be found.
Sections 3 and 4 of the IPC give the Indian Courts to inquire into offences, done by the Indians,
committed outside India. If the offences committed on any ship or aircraft registered in India,
irrespective of his nationality, he can be inquired by the Indian Courts.
PROVISIONS RELATED WITH “EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF CRPC”
Section 188 of the CRPC deals with the offences committed outside India. When an offence is
committed outside India-
(a) by a citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere; or
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 8|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
(b) by a person, not being such citizen, on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be
dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been com- mitted at any place within India at
which he may be found
189. Receipt of evidence relating to offences committed outside India. When any offence alleged
to have been committed in a territory outside India is being inquired into or tried under the
provisions of Section 188, the Central Government may, if it thinks fit, direct that copies of
depositions made or exhibits produced before a judicial officer in or for that territory or before a
diplomatic or consular representative of India in or for that territory shall be received as evidence
by the Court holdings such inquiry or trial in any case in which such Court might issue a
commission for taking evidence as to the matters to which such depositions exhibits relate.
The Section 188 of the CRPC provides for extra-territorial jurisdiction over Indian citizens as
well as Non-Indian Citizens.
Language of the Section is plain and simple. It operates where an offence is committed by a
citizen of India outside the country. Requirements are, therefore, one - commission of an
offence; second - by an Indian citizen; and third - that it should have been committed outside the
country.
The Section specifies two cases in which a person is triable for offence committed out of India,
namely, - (a) When an Indian citizen commits an offence in any place either on the high seas or
elsewhere, and (b) When any person, not being such citizen, commits an offence on any ship or
aircraft registered in India.
CRIMES COMMITTED OUTSIDE INDIA
Where an offence is committed beyond the boundary of India but the offender is found within
limits, two contingencies arise: - a) the offender may be given up for trial to the country where
the offence was committed (extradition) and b) the offender may be tried in India (extra-
territorial jurisdiction).
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 9|Page
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF CRPC
The Indian courts are empowered to try offences committed out of India either on land or on
ship, or on aircraft.
OFFENCES COMMITTED ON LAND
By virtue of Section 3 and 4 of Indian penal Code and Section 188 of CRPC, local courts can
take cognizance of offences committed beyond the territories of India.11 It was held in Om
Hemrajani v. State of U.P.12, that section 188 is to dispel any objection or plea of want of
jurisdiction at the behest of a fugitive who has committed an offence in any other country. If
such a person is found anywhere in India, the offence can be inquired into and tried by any Court
that may be approached by the victim. The convenience of victim is of importance. It is clear that
neither the place of business nor place of residence of the petitioner and for that matter of even
the complainant is of any relevance.
OFFENCES COMMITTED ON SHIP
The jurisdiction to try offences committed on high seas is known as admiralty jurisdiction. It is
founded on the principle that a ship on high seas is a "floating island" belonging to the nation
whose flag she is flying. It extends over Indian vessel, not only when they are sailing on the high
seas, but also when they are in the rivers of a foreign country at a place below bridges, where
tides ebbs and flows and where great ships go. It makes no difference whether ship is made fast
to the bottom of the river by anchor and cable, the admiralty jurisdiction extends over Indian
ships although they may be at a spot where municipal authorities of a foreign country might
exercise concurrent jurisdiction, if invoked.
The accused, an English sailor, stole three chests of tea out of a British vessel, when it was lying
in a river in China. It was urged that as the vessel was 20-30 miles from the sea, the offence was
11
Central bank of India v. Ram Narain, AIR 1955 SC 36
12
2005 1 SCC 617
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 10 | P a g e
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
committed on high seas. It was held the offence was committed within the admiralty
jurisdiction.13
COMMITTED ON AIRCRAFT
The provisions of the CRPC have been made applicable to any offence committed by any person
on any aircraft registered in India, wherever it may be. In Mayor Hans George14 the accused was
a German national travelling in a Swiss aircraft from Zurich to Manila. When the aircraft landed
at Bombay on 28 the November, 1962, in transit, he remained within the aircraft. He had not
filed a declaration regarding the Gold he was carrying on his personas required under Foreign
Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 as amended on 8 November, 1962. He was therefore,
apprehended, tried and convicted in India for the violation.
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY INDIAN CITIZENS BEYOND INDIA
Clause (a) of Section 188 of CRPC deals with the offence committed by Indian Citizen at any
place beyond India. The jurisdiction of the courts is not lost because venue of offence is in
foreign country. The case of Central Bank of India v. Ram Narain15 dealt with the offence
committed outside India, by a person who acquired Indian citizenship after he had committed the
said offence – It was held that the person had not acquired the citizenship of India at the time of
offence, and therefore Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 188 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure Code was not applicable.
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY FOREIGNERS IN INDIA
Crimen trahit personam: The Crime carries the person.16 The commission of Crime gives the
court of the place where it is committed jurisdiction over the person of the offender. The
13
Thomas Allen 1837 1 Mood CC 494
14
AIR 1965 SC 722
15
AIR 1955 SC 36
16
Law of Crimes, Ratan Lal Dhirajlal, Enlarged
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 11 | P a g e
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
fastening of criminal liability of a foreigner for offences committed in India are judicially
attributable to him notwithstanding that he is corporeally not present here at the time of
commission of a crime is not give extra-territorial operation of the law; for it is in respect of an
offence whose locality is in India, that the liability is fastened on that person.17
OFFENCES COMMITTED BY FOREIGNERS OUTSIDE INDIA
There is no express enactment by which the Indian legislature can assume to render foreigners
subject to the criminal law of India with reference to acts committed by them beyond the limits
of India.18
In Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel vs State of Gujarat & Anr 19 on a complaint by the appellant's
daughter-in-law, C.J.M., Gujarat take cognizance of the offence alleged to have been committed
by the appellant. But the appellant was not a citizen of India and according to the provision of
188 of Cr.P.C, this Section will be attracted only when alleged accused has to be a citizen of
India even if offence was committed outside India or by any person or any ship or aircraft
registered in India. An act will not be construed as applying to foreigners in respect to acts done
by them outside the dominions of the sovereign power enacting. That is a rule based on
international law, by which one sovereign power is bound to respect the subjects and the rights
of all other sovereign powers outside its own territory.
SANCTION UNDER SECTION 188
Sanction under sec. 188 is not a condition precedent to taking cognizance of the offence. If it
need be, it could be obtained before the trial begins. Where the conspiracy was hatched at
Chandigarh mere presentation of bill of lading at Dubai or payment at Dubai which were not
17
Mobarik Ali Ahmed, AIR 1957 SC 857
18
Supra Note 17
19
2008 6 SCC 789
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 12 | P a g e
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
isolated acts and were part of chain activities between the appellant side and his associates to
cheat the bank at Chandigarh; prior sanction prior sanction of Central Government under the
Section was not necessary.20
WHICH COURT CAN TRY SUCH OFFENCES
Generally, the rule is that The Courts within whose jurisdiction the offender may be found will
have jurisdiction in the matter. But it may not always be so.
In Empress v. Maganlal21 decided in the year 1882 interpreting the word 'found', it was opined
that it was used to confer the jurisdiction to the court of a place where the accused is actually
found, i.e., produced before the Court and not where a person is discovered. In other words, it
would mean that an accused may be discovered by the Police at a place not within the
jurisdiction of the Court enquiring or trying but that is not the place contemplated by Section188.
For the purpose of jurisdiction, it would be the court where he is actually produced or appears
which can have said to have found him.
In Emperor v. Vinayak Damodar Sarvarkar22 the contention that the accused is charged before a
Magistrate with an offence under the Penal Code and was brought there illegally from a foreign
country was rejected. An illustration was given in that a man commits a crime, say murder, in a
country but he escapes to some other country before he is apprehended, the Police finding him in
some other country, brings him to England and produces him before a Magistrate. It would not
be open to the Magistrate to refuse to commit him.
The Court held that "If he were brought here for trial, it would not be a plea to the jurisdiction of
the Court that he had escaped from justice, and that by some illegal means he had been brought
back". In the above decision of the Court cannot be said to be a good law in the present times
when we have to follow due process of law where even a legal act done through illegal means
will be illegal only. The principle of fruit of a poisonous tree must follow here. I hold that the
above observation of the court does not qualify to be a good law in a democratic society.
20
Ajay Agarwal v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 1637
21
ILR Bom 6 622
22
1910 (35) ILR 223
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 13 | P a g e
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
In the case of in Om Hemrajani v. State of U.P.23 the scheme underlying Section188 is to dispel
any objection or plea of want of jurisdiction at the behest of a fugitive who has committed an
offence in any other country. If such a person is found anywhere in India, the offence can be
inquired into and tried by any Court that may be approached by the victim. The victim who has
suffered at the hands of the accused on a foreign land can complain about the offence to a Court,
otherwise competent, which he may find convenient. The convenience is of the victim and not
that of the accused. It is not the requirement of Section188 that the victim shall state in the
complaint as to which place the accused may be found. It is enough to allege the accused may be
found in India. The Court where the complaint may be filed and the accused either appears
voluntarily pursuant to issue of process or is brought before it involuntarily in execution of
warrants, would be the competent Court within the meaning of Section 188 of the Code as that
Court would find the accused before him when he appears. The finding has to be by the Court. It
has neither to be by the complainant nor by the Police. The Section deems the offence to be
committed within the jurisdiction of the Court where the accused may be found.
23
2005 1 SCC 617
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 14 | P a g e
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB
CONCLUSION
As a general rule, every offence must be inquired into and tried by the court within whose
jurisdiction it was committed. At the same time however, if any offence is inquired into or tried
by a magistrate who has no territorial jurisdiction over the place of offence, it would amount to
irregularity and the trial would not be vitiated nor the conviction and sentence set aside on the
ground of wrong place of trial unless it has occasioned failure of justice.
At the same time, however, the prosecution cannot choose a wrong court by ignoring the clear
provision of the code. The provision of Section 462 of Cr. P.C. protect proceedings initiated in a
wrong court if failure of justice has not occasioned thereby. But that Section does not empower
the magistrate to proceed with a trial with his eyes open to the fact of want of territorial
jurisdiction.
Whenever an objection as to jurisdiction of the court is raised, trial cannot proceed unless that
question is decided. If the defect regarding jurisdiction is pointed out before the commencement
of the trial, it should be set right immediately. But if an objection as to the place of trial is not
raised at the preliminary stage, such objection may not be raised by an appellate or revisional
court if no prejudice is caused to the accused.
Finally, it should be remembered that the court has to decide the question of jurisdiction with
reference to the facts stated, allegations levelled and averments made in the complaint and
charge-sheet not on the basis of the defence of the accused. But the facts are positively disproved
or the court is satisfied that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, the court will have to
return the complaint to the complainant for the presentation to the proper court.
PROJECT FOR CRIMINAL LAW- I 15 | P a g e
