Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XIV: Conditions Requisite for Initiation of Proceedings
Section 193: Cognizance of offences by Courts of Session
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
Unless this Code or another law expressly provides otherwise, a Court of Session cannot take cognizance of an offence as a court of first instance unless a Magistrate has committed the case to it.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Except as otherwise expressly provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence as a Court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate under this Code.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 193
-
Gurdeep Singh v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose whether the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences u/ss.307, 353, 332, 225, 186, and 120B IPC and s.25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the courts below was legally sustainable.
-
Kallu Nat Alias Mayank Kumar Nagar v. State of U.P. and Anr.
Whether the Court of Session, without itself recording evidence, can summon a person to stand trial in exercise of its powers u/s.193, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as an accused (along with others committed to it by…
-
Harjinder Singh v. The State of Punjab & Anr.
Whether the evidence led, in the instant case, justified the Trial Court’s exercise of power u/s.319 CrPC to summon respondent no. 2, and whether the High Court was right in setting that order aside at the threshold.
-
Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Aditya Sarda
Matter pertains to the sustainability of orders passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to respondents accused of serious economic offences, and avoiding execution of summons or warrants, disobeying the…
-
Satbir Singh v. Rajesh Kumar and Others
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court whereby it set aside the order of the trial court summoning respondents as additional accused for facing trial along with the principal accused.
- Rupi Babbar v. State NCT of Delhi
- Ms. X v. The State (Nct of Delhi) and Ors
-
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India v. Satyanarayan Bankatlal Malu & Ors.
Special Court under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 would be as provided u/s. 435 of the Companies Act as it existed at the time when the Code came into effect, or it would be as provided u/s.435 after the 2018…
- Yogesh Sudhanshu Kumar v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office
- Abraham George v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office
- Mahendra Gambhir v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office
- Yashodhan Singh & Ors. v. The State of Uttar
- Acharya v. State of Maharashtra, (2001) 5 SCC 453 : 2001
- Sh. Bharat Bhardwaj @ Nikku v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
- Dr. Bindu Rana v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office
- Ramveer Upadhyay & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Nahar Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Pradeep S. Wodeyar v. The State of Karnataka
- Shantaben Bhurabhai Bhuriya v. Anand Athabhai Chaudhari & Ors.
- Manjeet Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.
- Sartaj Singh v. State of Haryana & Anr. Etc.
- Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu
- Union of India v. Ashok Kumar Sharma and Others
- Sri A.M.C.S. Swamy Ade/Dpe/Hyd (Central) v. Mehdi Agah Karbalai & Anr.
- Madan Mohan v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
- Girish Sharma & Ors. v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
- Girlsh Kumar Suneja v. C.B.L.
- Balveer Singh & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
- Prasad Shrikant Purohit v. State of Maharashtra & Anr
- R. N. Agarwal v. R. C. Bansal & Ors.
- Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.
- Dharam Pal & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr.
- Essar Teleholdings Ltd. v. Registrar General, Delhi High Court & Ors
- General Officer Commanding v. CBI and Anr
- Rattiram & Ors. v. State of M. P. Through Inspector of Police
- Jaswant & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
- Moly and Anr. v. State of Kerala
- M.A. Kuttappan v. E. Krlshnan Nayanar and Anr.
- Vidyadharan v. State of Kerala
- Harshad S. Mehta and Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bhooraji and Ors.
- Gangula Ashok and Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh
- P.V. Narasimha Rao Etc. Etc. v. State (Cbl/Spe) Etc. Etc.
- Bharat Ram Meena v. Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur and Ors .
- Nisar and Anr v. State of U.P
- A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak and Another
- State of Tamil Nadu v. V. Krishnnaswami Naidu & Anr.
- Joginder Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.