High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry ortrial shall take place
Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with high Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry ortrial shall take place. High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry or trial shall take place. The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry or trial shall take place. Where two or more Courts have taken cognizance of the same offence and a question arises as to which of them ought to inquire into or try that offence, the question shall be decided-
(a) if the Courts are subordinate to the same High Court, by that High Court;
(b) if the Courts are not subordinate to the same High Court, by the High Court within the local limits of whose appellate criminal jurisdiction the proceedings were first commenced ____________________________________________________________________
1 Ins. by Act 45 of 1978, s. 15 (w.e.f. 18-12-1980).
_____________________________________________________________________
and thereupon all other proceedings in respect of that offence shall
be discontinued.
Section 186, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 206 High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry or trial shall take place Text carried over almost unchanged 91%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Kaushik Chaterjee vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The question of territorial jurisdiction in criminal proceedings is a question of fact that must be established through evidence and cannot be decided at the transfer petition stage. The trial court, not the Supreme Court, is the appropriate forum to decide jurisdictional issues after evidence is led on the place of commission of the offence and other relevant factors enumerated in Sections 177 to 184 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, transfer petitions seeking transfer on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction must be dismissed, leaving it open to the parties to raise and have the trial court decide the jurisdictional issue during the trial.
On this section: Empowers the High Court, in case where 2 or more courts have taken cognizance of the same offence and a question as to which should inquire or try has arisen, to decide the district where inquiry or trial shall take place.
-
Kamal Kishore vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When multiple courts have taken cognizance of the same criminal offence, the High Court within whose appellate criminal jurisdiction the proceedings were first commenced has the authority under Section 186 CrPC to determine the proper venue for trial. In exercising this discretion, the High Court should consider practical factors including the location of the accused, the place where the offence occurred, the stage of proceedings in each court, and the interests of justice. Where the accused are imprisoned in one jurisdiction, charges have been framed, and trial has commenced in that jurisdiction, and the offence occurred there, that court should be designated as the proper venue for trial, notwithstanding that another court took cognizance first.
On this section: High Court's power to decide district where inquiry or trial shall take place when multiple courts have taken cognizance of same offence
-
Xxx vs In Re- State of Assam
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a criminal offence is continuing in nature, initiated in one jurisdiction with consequences ensuing in that same jurisdiction, and parts of the offence (including the consequences) occur within that jurisdiction, the court having jurisdiction over that area where the offence was initiated and consequences ensued has the authority to conduct the trial, even if part of the criminal acts occurred in a different jurisdiction. This principle applies under Sections 178 and 179 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and the trial court need not be changed merely because some acts constituting the offence occurred in a different territorial jurisdiction.
On this section: Cited as empowering the High Court to decide, in case of doubt, the district where inquiry or trial shall take place. Court held that this section need not be invoked as the matter could be resolved under Sections 178 and 179.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 186
What have the courts held on Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Kaushik Chaterjee vs State of Haryana (30 Sep 2020) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Empowers the High Court, in case where 2 or more courts have taken cognizance of the same offence and a question as to which should inquire or try has arisen, to decide the district where inquiry or trial shall take place. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2003 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 186, section 186 CRPC, section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Kaushik Chaterjee vs State of Haryana (30 Sep 2020).
What should I read with Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 206 (High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry or trial shall take place), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 186, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.