CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IS TERRITORIAL AS WELL AS EXTRA – TERRITORIAL – PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE WHICH PROVIDES LIABILITY FOR EXTRATERRITORIAL OFFENCES.

 

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IS TERRITORIAL AS WELL AS EXTRA – TERRITORIAL – PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE WHICH PROVIDES LIABILITY FOR EXTRATERRITORIAL OFFENCES.

Section 1 of IPC reads as follows:

This act shall be called the Indian penal code, and shall extend to the whole of india except the state of jammu and Kashmir.

The Indian penal code was drafted by the first Indian law commission of which Lord. Macaulay was the president, and was submitted to the governor – General of india in council in 1837; but it was not until 1860 that it took its place on the Indian statute book.

Before 1860, the English criminal law, as modified by several acts, was administered in the presidency – towns of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras. But in the mofussil, the courts were principally guided by the mahomedan criminal law, the glaring defects of which were partly removed by regulations of the local governments. In 1827, the judicial system of Bombay was thoroughly revised and from that time the law which the criminal courts administered was set forth in a regulation defining offences and specifying punishments. But in the Bengal and Madras presidencies the mohameden criminal law was in force till the Indian penal code came into operation.

Extra – territorial jurisdiction

Indian courts are empowered to try offences out of india on (A) land, (B) high seas, or (C) aircraft.

(A) Land

By virtue of sec 3 & 4 of the penal code, and sec. 188 of the code of criminal procedure, local courts can take cognizance of offences committed beyond the territories of india. Where the court is dealing with an act committed outside india by a citizen of india which would be an offence punishable under the penal code if it had been committed in india, Sec.4 constitutes the act of offence and it can be dealt with under sec. 188 of the criminal procedure code. If however, at the time o commission of the offence the accused person is not a citizen of india, the provisions of sec.4 of the penal code and sec 188 of the code of criminal procedure have no application.

Sec 188 of the criminal procedure code 1973, provides that when an offence is committed outside india

a.  By a citizen of india, whether on high seas or elsewhere,  or

b.  By any person not being such citizen on any ship or air craft registered in india, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been committed at any place within india at which he may be found.

The word ‘found’ in sec 188 of criminal procedure code, means not where a person is discovered but where he is actually present. A man brought to a place against his will can be said to be found there. When a man is in the country and is charged before a magistate with an offence under the penal code, it will not avail him to say that he was brought there illegally from a foreign country. The Bombay high court has laid down this principle, following English precedents, in savarkar’s case. The accused Sarvarkar had escaped at Mareseilles from the custody of police – officers charged with the duty of bringing him from London to Bombay, but was re-arrested there and brought to Bombay and committed for trial by the special magistrate at Nasik the high court held that the trial and committal were valid.

Section 4 gives extra – territorial jurisdiction but as the explanation says the acts committed must amount to an offence under the penal code.

Acts done within Indian as well as foreign territory. A person who is a citizen of india is liable to be tried by the courts of this country for acts done by him partly within and partly without the indian territories, provided the acts amount together to an offence under the code.