This article has been written by Akanksha Chowdhury. This article contains a brief introduction of what the word jurisdiction implies followed by the definition of intra territorial jurisdiction and then the article completely concentrates on the extra territorial jurisdiction under IPC.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Before talking about extra territorial jurisdiction, it is important to understand what does the word jurisdiction exactly mean under IPC.
The word jurisdiction comprises two different words, juris which means law and dicer which means to speak. In simple words jurisdiction means authority or power given to various legal bodies so that It can provide justice within their defined field of authority.
Legal body includes all courts, governmental and political bodies. Now a question might arise why the concept of jurisdiction was introduced: this was done so that all the legal bodies would know about which matters they have to adjudicate and also to ensure that the courts do not overstep their boundaries in any manner.
Under IPC there is Territorial Jurisdiction which is further subdivided into two other jurisdictions:
- Intraterritorial jurisdiction
- Extraterritorial jurisdiction
Now as we know that the Indian Penal Code which was introduced in the year 1860, provides us with an in-depth knowledge about all kinds of crimes and is really helpful for the law students, and it applies to all over India except for Jammu and Kashmir. However sometimes it also applies to extra territorial jurisdiction.[1]
In this article We will mainly concentrate on the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction under IPC however let us start by understanding what Intraterritorial jurisdiction means.
Intra territorial jurisdiction
Definition- Section 2 of IPC deals with Intra territorial jurisdiction.
Section 2- Punishment of offences committed within India:
Every person shall be liable to punishment under this code and not otherwise for any act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within.
Section 5- This section is an exception to section 2, section 5 of the code, which is saving clause to section 2 and excludes the operation of the IPC in those cases where separate provisions have been made by a special or local law to deal with such offences mentioned therein, reads:
Certain laws not to be affected by this Act- Nothing in this act shall affect the provision of any Act for punishing mutiny and desertion of officers, soldiers, sailors or airmen in the service of the Government of India or the provisions of any special or local law.
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Definition-
A particular crime is considered to be extra territorial in nature when it happens in a particular country but the trial takes place in some other country.
Now Section 3 and 4 of IPC deals with extra territorial jurisdiction.
Illustration- B, a citizen of India, commits a murder in London. He can be tried and convicted of murder in any place in India in which he may be found.
Section 3
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.[2]
Section 4
Extension of code to extraterritorial offences- The provisions of this code apply also to any offence committed by:
- Any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India.
- 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.
A- The word ‘offence’ includes every act committed outside India which if committed in India would be punishable under this Code.
B- The ‘computer resources shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (k) of subsection (1) of section 2 of IT Act, 2000.
Scope of Section 3 and Section 4: Indian Penal Code
As we read earlier both these sections deal with offences committed beyond the territorial limits of India.
There are 2 conditions that are required to be fulfilled before section 3 can be imposed are as follows:
Firstly- There should be an allegation that no matter whether a citizen of India or not has committed a crime outside India which if committed in India would be punishable under IPC.
Secondly- That person is liable under some Indian Law to be tried in India for that offence.
When both these conditions are satisfied the accused person is required to be dealt with according to the provisions of the IPC in the same manner as if the particular crime had been committed in India.
One of the earliest cases relating to section 3 and 4 was:
Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh
In this case, Shiv Bahadur Singh and another person were the Minister for Industries and secretary to the Industries Department of the then United States of Vindhya Pradesh. The state of Panna was one of the component states of Vindhya Pradesh. Diamonds are extensively found and mined in a place called Panna. In 1936, The Panna Durbar entered into a 15-year lease contract with the panna diamond mining syndicate to operate the diamond mines. In October 1947 when the above mentioned two persons were the minister and secretary, the permission to mine was abruptly terminated on the ground that the syndicate was not carrying on the operations in a proper way.
By February 1949 it was alleged that the two persons had conspired together and were demanding money for the purpose of revoking the cancellation orders. They were also alleged to have received illegal gratification up to Rs 25000 at the constitution house, Delhi. However, they were acquitted by the trial court, however the appellate court convicted them and sentenced to three years imprisonment. Also, it was said by the supreme court that though the offence of giving gratification money took place outside the state of panna sections 3 and 4, IPC clearly covered the field and when read with section 188 of CPC permitted the prosecution to be launched against the appellants. Hence the conviction of the appellants including extra territorial offence said to have been committed by the first appellant was held not open for challenge.[3]
About liability of a foreigner for offences commit in India
An Indian citizen is held liable for prosecution for anything done in foreign land if the act committed is an offence in India, although the same may not be an offence in the foreign country where it is committed. Likewise, a foreigner even if he had not been in India at the time the actual occurrence took place would be still liable if the act was completed in India.
In the case of Mubarak Ali, the following things were held by Supreme Court:
- A foreigner who commits an offence within India is guilty and can be punished as such without any limitation as to his corporeal presence in India at the time.
- Section 2, IPC applies to a foreigner who has committed an offence within India notwithstanding that he was corporeally present outside.
- Being a foreign national does not imply that the foreigner will not be liable for criminal acts in the country. In fact, nationality cannot be a limiting principle in respect of criminal jurisdiction which is primarily concerned with security of the state and of the citizens of the state.
Liability of a foreigner who obtains Indian Citizenship after committing an offence as a foreigner
The IPC clearly says that if an Indian commits an offence outside India he will be liable under section 3 and 4. IPC confers power on Indian Courts to try the offences however if a foreigner commits an offence outside India as foreigner and subsequently he acquires an Indian citizenship the fact that he has acquired the citizenship will not make the person criminally liable for the act committed even if such act is considered an offence in Indian law.
Admiralty Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction to try offences committed on the high seas is known as admiralty jurisdiction. It is based on the principle that a ship on the high seas is a floating island belonging to the nation whose flag it is flying.
It extends over:
- Offences committed on Indian Ships on the high seas
- Offences committed on the foreign ships in Indian territorial waters
- Piracy
The admiralty jurisdiction was not available previously however after the Admiralty Offences Act 1894 and the merchant shipping act 1894 magistrates are conferred jurisdiction to, they and dispose of all offences committed by any person upon the sea or in river, creek or place. (The term any person means both Indians and non-Indian) who will be held liable for offences committed in Indian Ships and aircraft which are registered in India. [4]
Cases
Mohamed Sajeed v. State of Kerala
In this case the division bench ruled that police could investigate into a foreign country however the prior sanction of the Central Government for purposes of investigation is not necessary.
Central Bank of India Ltd v. Raj Narain
In this case there was a man named Raj Narain was a resident of a place called Multan, just before the participation a cash credit limit of 3 lakhs was provided to him and he had pledged stocks worth 2 lakhs during partition. However the bank complained that he owed the rest of the money to them also it was said that he had obtained those stocks illegally and sold it at Karachi and later on he migrated to India, the bank tried to get the money from him but they failed every time at the end they had to secure sanction from Central Government under section 188 of CPC.
Raj Narain resisted saying that when all this happened, he was a Pakistani national and therefore he cannot be held liable, at last when the case was taken to supreme court and it held that according to section 4 of IPC if while committing a crime is an Indian then it won’t matter where the crime was committed. However, if at the time of commission of offence, the accused is not an Indian Citizen, then this section will not apply.
Conclusion
Through this article we got a clear picture on the instances of the jurisdiction along with an area of cases where we have seen its application. This article has been written for the purpose to know about the laws which come under IPC and a picture on how it works. This also gives an idea to the Governments so that they get to know how they can use their powers irrespective of someone’s Nationality. Any authority can claim according to their wish without any barriers in the middle. But the main factor that comes over here is that it must be done with an agreement from both the sides of Legal Authorities. It involves extra territorial powers exercised by the states so as to punish the guilty.
References
- PSA Pillai Criminal Law, especially chapter 20, for an in-depth analysis
- Ratanlal & Dhirajlal IPC
- Ratanlal & Dhirajlal IPC, Pag
- Justice M.R. Mullick Criminal Manual
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
