सं Samvidhan

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Section 202

Offences committed by means of electronic communications, letters, etc

Why this exists

Traditional criminal procedure assumed offences happened in one physical place, making jurisdiction easy to fix. But cheating through phones, emails, and online messages often spans multiple cities or states, and bigamy cases often involve spouses living in different places after separation. This provision (continuing a rule from the earlier Code of Criminal Procedure) gives victims flexibility to file cases in a location convenient to them, rather than forcing them to chase the accused's location alone.

How courts read it

Indian courts, interpreting the predecessor provision under the old CrPC (Section 182), have held that in cheating cases involving digital communication, jurisdiction can lie either where the deceptive message originated or where it was received, giving victims a choice. Courts have also clarified that for bigamy, the wife from the first marriage can file a complaint in the place where she has resettled after the marriage broke down, recognizing the practical hardship faced by women who relocate after such offences.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: A cheating case using online messages can only be filed where the scammer is physically located.
    Fact: The law allows the case to be filed either where the message was sent or where it was received, giving the victim more options.
  • Myth: A bigamy case can only be filed where the second marriage took place.
    Fact: It can also be filed where the couple last lived together, or where the first wife has since permanently settled.