B. PROBLEM-BASED MAINS QUESTIONS (WITH MODEL ANSWERS)
Problem 1
A kidnaps B from Patna and keeps him confined in Ranchi for ten days. FIR is lodged in Patna. The accused challenges jurisdiction of Patna court.
Answer
Kidnapping with continued confinement is a continuing offence.
Under Section 200 BNSS, any court having jurisdiction over any of the local areas where the offence continues may try the offence.
Both Patna and Ranchi courts have jurisdiction.
The objection raised by the accused is unsustainable.
Problem 2
A defamatory post is uploaded from Hyderabad, causing reputational harm to the complainant in Delhi. FIR is registered in Delhi.
Answer
Under Section 201 BNSS, where an act is done in one place and its consequence ensues in another, courts at either place have jurisdiction.
Since reputational harm occurred in Delhi, Delhi courts have valid jurisdiction.
The FIR is legally maintainable.
Problem 3
An offence is committed during a train journey from Mumbai to Jaipur. The exact location of offence cannot be ascertained.
Answer
When it is uncertain in which local area the offence was committed, jurisdiction may be exercised by any court having jurisdiction over the areas through which the journey passed, read with Section 200 BNSS.
Thus, courts along the route, including Mumbai or Jaipur, may exercise jurisdiction.
Problem 4
A cognizable offence occurs in Chennai, but the victim lodges FIR in Bengaluru, where she presently resides. Police refuse to register FIR citing lack of jurisdiction.
Answer
Refusal to register FIR on territorial grounds is impermissible.
The FIR must be registered as a Zero FIR and later transferred to the competent police station.
This is consistent with the duty to register information under BNSS and settled Supreme Court law.
🏆 TOPPER’S CLOSING LINE (USE ANYWHERE)
“Criminal jurisdiction under BNSS reflects a purposive balance between territorial certainty and effective access to justice, particularly in continuing and consequence-based offences