Key differences between IPC and CrPC

As citizens of India, it is important to be well versed with the laws of our country, more so, when it comes to society at large. The criminal laws impact not just individuals but the entire society. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are two of the most important legislation governing crimes in India. Besides these, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is the third legislation under criminal law in India.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC)

The Indian Penal Code is the official criminal code of India, which was drafted way back in 1860. It’s objective is to provide a general penal code for the country. It has 511 sections across 23 chapters, providing the list of crimes along with their definitions and punishments. The IPC has been amended several times and is now supplemented by other Acts. Its jurisdiction extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Here is the detailed overview of the important provisions of the CrPC –

• Chapter 1 – Introduction (Section 1 – 5)
• Chapter 2 – General Explanations (Section 6 – 52A)
• Chapter 3 – Of punishments (Section 53 -75)
• Chapter 4 – General Exceptions (Section 76 – 106)
• Chapter 5 – Of Abetment (Section 107 – 120)
• Chapter 5A – Of Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120A and 120B)
• Chapter 6 – Of offenses against the State (Section 121 – 130)
• Chapter 7 – Of offences relating to the army, navy and air force (Section 131 – 140)
• Chapter 8 – Of offences against the public tranquillity (Section 141 – 160)
• Chapter 9A – Of offences relating to elections (Section 171A – Section 171I)
• Chapter 10 – Of contempts of the lawful authority of public servants (Section 172 – 190)
• Chapter 11 – Of false evidence and offences against public justice (Section 191 – 229)
• Chapter 12 – Of offences relating to coin and government stamps (Section 230 – 263A)
• Chapter 13 – Of offences relating To weights and measures (Section 264 – 267)
• Chapter 14 – Of Offences Affecting The Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency And Morals (Section 268 – 294A)
• Chapter 15 – Of Offences Relating To Religion (Section 295 – 298)
• Chapter 16 – Of Offences Affecting The Human Body (Section 299 – 377)
• Chapter 17 – Of Offences Against Property (Section 378 – 462)
• Chapter 18 – Of Offences Relating To Documents And To Property Marks (Section 463 – 489E)
• Chapter 19 – Of The Criminal Breach Of Contracts Of Service (Section 490 – 492)
• Chapter 20 – Of Offences Relating To Marriage (Section 493 – 498)
• Chapter 20A – Of Cruelty By Husband Or Relatives Of Husband (Section 498A)
• Chapter 21 – Of Defamation (Section 499 – 502)
• Chapter 22 – Of Criminal Intimidation, Insult And Annoyance (Section 503 – 510)
• Chapter 23 – Of Attempts To Commit Offences (Section 511)

The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) –

The Code of Criminal Procedure is the main legislation on the procedure for the regulation of criminal law in India. The CrPC details the procedure for the investigation of the crime, presenting criminals before the court of law, collection of evidence, determination of guilt or innocence of the accused, imposition of penalties or punishments etc. It further lays down the hierarchy of the courts competent to try criminal lawsuits. In descending order it is the High Court at the top followed by Sessions Court, First Class Judicial Magistrate, Second Class Judicial Magistrate and Executive Magistrate. There is a limit affixed for sentences which these courts can pass against the accused. The Supreme Court is the apex court, and it has the ultimate power. The code was enacted in 1973. At present, the CrPC contains 484 sections cut across 37 chapters. It also has two schedules and 56 forms.

Here is the detailed overview of the important provisions of the CrPC –

• Chapter 1 – Preliminary (Section 1 – 5)
• Chapter 2 – Constitution of Criminal Courts and Offices (Section 6 – 25)
• Chapter 3 – Power of Courts (Section 26 – 35)
• Chapter 4 – Powers of Superior Officers of Police (Section 36 – 40)
• Chapter 5 – Arrest of Persons (Section 41 – 60)
• Chapter 6 – Processes to compel Appearance (Section 61 – 90)
• Chapter 13 – Jurisdiction of the Criminal Courts in inquiries and trials (Section 177 – 189)
• Chapter 14 – Conditions requisite for initiation of proceeding (Section 190 – 199)
• Chapter 15 – Complaints to Magistrates (Section 200 – 203)
• Chapter 16 – Commencement of proceedings before magistrates (Section 204 – 210)
• Chapter 17 – The Charge (Section 211 – 224)
• Chapter 18 – Trail before a court of session (Section 225 -237)
• Chapter 19 – Trial of warrant-cases by magistrates (Section 238 – 250)
• Chapter 20 – Trial of summons-cases by magistrates (Section 251 – 259)
• Chapter 21 – Summary Trials (Section 260 – 265)
• Chapter 22 – Attendance of persons confined or detained in prisons (Section 266 – 271)
• Chapter 23 – Evidence in inquiries and trials (Section 272 – 299)
• Chapter 24 – General provisions as to inquiries and trials (Section 300 – 327)
• Chapter 25 – Provisions as to accused persons of unsound mind (Section 328 – 339)
• Chapter 26 – Provisions as to offences affecting the administration of justice ( Section 340 – 352)
• Chapter 27 – The Judgement (Section 353 – 365)
• Chapter 28 – Submission of death sentences for confirmation (Section 366 – 371)
• Chapter 29 – Appeals (Section 372 – 394)
• Chapter 30 – Reference and Revision (Section 395 – 405)
• Chapter 31 – Transfer of criminal cases (Section 406 – 412)
• Chapter 32 – Execution, Suspension, Remission and Commutation of Sentences (Section 413 – 435)
• Chapter 33 – Provisions as to bail and bonds (Section 436 – 450)
• Chapter 34 – Disposal of Property (Section 451 – 459)
• Chapter 35 – Irregular Proceedings (Section 460 – 466)
• Chapter 36 – Limitation for taking cognizance of certain offences (Section 467 – 473)
• Chapter 37 – Miscellaneous (Section 474 – 484)

Major Difference between IPC and CrPC –

1.  The IPC provides a substantive list of all crimes and lays down the punishment for each one of them. For example, Section 378 defines Theft as “Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that per­son’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.” The punishment for the offence of theft is spelt out under Section 379 in the following words, “Whoever commits theft shall be pun­ished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.” On the other hand, CrPC is a procedural law, and it lays down the ways or methods to be followed in a criminal case. So if a person is charged with ‘theft’, it is the CrPC which provides further details as to how the investigation would be carried out, how evidence will be collected etc. So CrPC concerns itself with the procedural aspect of the crime.
2. The primary purpose of IPC is to provide a general penal code for India which prescribes punishments to wrong-doers. The primary goal of CrPC is to consolidate the criminal law in the country.
3. The Indian Penal Code is a substantive law whereas, the Code of Criminal Procedure is procedural law.

CONCLUSION –

The Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act are the three primary legislation governing criminal law in India. They continue to play an important role in the court of law for the effective administration of justice. Besides, there are other legislations such as the Prohibition of Child Trafficking Act, the Juvenile Justice Act, which supplement the three main legislation. Both the IPC and the CrPC are pan-India in nature and extend to the whole of the State. Jammu and Kashmir are beyond their jurisdiction. IPC is the only substantive law here, and the Indian Evidence Act and the CrPC are the procedural laws.

Ten Bounced Cheque Cases In Online Banking Era That Had Gone Way Too Far

Introduction To Negotiable Instrument

  

A negotiable instrument is a transferable signed document that promises to pay the bearer a sum of money at a future date or on demand. Negotiable Instrument is a general term, and as per section 13 of Negotiable Instruments Act, there are three kinds of negotiable tools, it includes a promissory note[1], bill of exchange[2] or cheque [3] payable moreover to order to bearer.

The Negotiable Instruments Act came into force in the year 1881. Before this legislation was brought into force, laws relating to negotiable instruments were governed by English laws. Later the Act operates on the subject provision of Section 31 and 32 of the Reserve Bank of India Act 1934.

A Cheque is said to be bounced or dishonored when the bank can not clear it for want of sufficient funds in the account or various other reasons, some of it can be overwritten on the cheque, payment stopped by the account holder, signature mismatch, etc.

Dishonor of a negotiable instrument can be broadly committed in two ways, Dishonour by non-acceptance[4] and non-payment[5]. As per Section 138 of the Act, the disgrace of a cheque is a crime and is disciplinary by custody up to two years or with financial forfeit or with both.

The recipient must show the sign to the drawer with 30 days from the date of in receipt of “Cheque Return Memo” from the bank. The notice must be positioning that the cheque sum must be rewarded to the recipient within 15 days from the date of receiving of the notice by the drawer. After in receipt of the notice, if the drawer doesn’t make the sum within 15 days from the day of in receipt of the notice, then he has committed a wrong under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The grievance should be listed in a judge’s court within a month of the termination of the notice period. It is vital in this case to refer an attorney who is well experienced and accomplished in this area of practice to proceed additional in the stuff.

On 18^th of February 2019, in the case of Sri Santhosh J v. Sri V Narasimha Murthy, High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore; proposed to amend the said act to address the issue of delay in the final resolution of cheque dishonor cases to provide relief to payees of the dishonored cheque. In addition to this, it will also discourage frivolous and unnecessary litigations and save the time of the Court.

After this proposal, certain amendments which are to be brought in the legislature were drafted in the form of The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Bill, 2017. After being passed by the Lok Sabha, the said Act is a step closer to becoming a law. In the age of net banking, businesses across India use cheques, including post-dated ones, to make and receive payments from vendors, suppliers, and customers.

The Rajya Sabha passes proposed amendments to be brought after this bill-

1. It aims to bring the provision enforce, under which the drawer of the cheque that has been dishonored to pay interim compensation to the complainant.
2. The Interim compensation that is to be provided shall not exceed the 20% of the amount of the cheque that was dishonored.
3. The interim compensation is to be paid by the drawer of the dishonored cheque in a summary trial or a summons case. The same is applicable even if he pleads not guilty to the charge made in the complaint.
4. The drawer of the cheque has to pay interim compensation within 60 days of the date of order. However, it is at the discretion of the bench to give an extension of further 30 days but not beyond that.
5. In the case when the drawer of the cheque is acquitted in the case, the complainant has to repay the drawer the interim compensation with interest. The repayment has to made within 60 days from the date of the order of the court.
6. An additional 20 percent compensation will have to be paid if the drawer goes for an appeal. This amount would be over the Interim compensation amount paid during the initial period of the suit. This clause aims to deter appeals.

Cutting across the party line, members of opposition parties including Congress supported the bill but suggested that the punishment must be more stringent to curb cheque payments defaults. Another view in the opposition of bill was that there is a presupposition that drawee is wrong and the payee is right, which is right, which is not good. In some instances, the payee is also a culprit.

During the debate on the bill, the Congress Leader Madhusudan Mistry said the penalty proposed was not enough to curb the fraudulent practices. They said the government should come out with laws in parallel with France and UAE, wherein the person who has committed default in the payment of cheque shall be barred from issuing a cheque for five years. This has proved to be an effective deterrence strategy, for that of an experimental law like this.

[1] Section 4 NI Act

[2] Section 5 NI Act

[3] Section 6 NI Act

[4] Section 91 NI Act

[5] Section 92 NI Act

       Original blog is published at LEGODESK  please read the blog for more content and for legal help

                                                                      • • • • • • •

Legodesk is a legal practice management tool using which lawyers can manage their matters, win new clients and do their legal research all in one platform. Legodesk’s unique case management features helps to keep your legal practice organized and accessible everywhere.