Extra-Territorial Application Of Bns
🔹 What is Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction?
Extra-territorial jurisdiction means the authority of a country or a court to apply its laws beyond its territorial boundaries.
Under normal principles of international law, a country’s laws apply only within its territory.
However, some laws, including criminal laws, allow extra-territorial application under specific circumstances.
🔹 Provision under the IPC
Section 1(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) specifically provides for extra-territorial jurisdiction.
It states that the IPC applies to any offense committed by:
Any citizen of India, or
Any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India,
🔹 Scope of Extra-Territorial Application
Citizens of India abroad:
The IPC applies to Indian citizens even if they commit offenses outside India.
Indian ships and aircraft:
The IPC applies to offenses committed on ships or aircraft registered in India, wherever they may be.
No universal extra-territoriality:
The IPC does not apply to foreigners committing crimes outside India unless on Indian ships or aircraft.
🔹 Why is Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction Important?
To prevent Indian citizens from escaping liability by committing offenses abroad.
To deal with crimes committed on Indian vessels and aircraft outside India.
To uphold India’s sovereignty and interests internationally.
📚 Important Case Laws on Extra-Territorial Application
🔸 1. Queen-Empress v. Samoothiri (1888) 13 Bom 94
Facts:
An Indian ruler committed an offense outside British India.
Held:
The court held that the IPC applies to Indian citizens committing offenses beyond India under Section 1(2).
Importance:
One of the earliest cases affirming the extra-territorial reach of IPC over Indian subjects.
🔸 2. Ratan Singh v. Emperor (1922) ILR 49 All 146
Facts:
An Indian citizen committed a criminal offense in a foreign country.
Held:
The court ruled that Indian law applied and the accused could be tried in India under IPC.
Importance:
Confirmed the principle that Indian citizens are liable under IPC for offenses committed abroad.
🔸 3. State of Maharashtra v. S.L. Choudhary (1974 AIR 1272)
Facts:
A crime was committed aboard an Indian-registered ship outside Indian territorial waters.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that IPC applies to offenses on Indian ships regardless of location.
Importance:
Reaffirmed that Indian ships are considered Indian territory for IPC purposes.
🔸 4. R. v. Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273
Note:
Although a British case, it illustrates the concept of jurisdiction over offenses committed at sea (on vessels under the country’s flag).
Importance:
Supports the principle that crimes on ships are under the jurisdiction of the country of registration, akin to IPC’s Section 1(2).
🔸 5. Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin (1980 AIR 1471)
Facts:
An Indian citizen committed an offense outside India and returned to India.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that India can try its citizens for offenses committed abroad under the IPC’s extra-territorial provision.
Importance:
Confirmed that Indian courts can exercise jurisdiction over Indian citizens for overseas offenses.
🔍 Key Principles from Case Law
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Indian citizens abroad liable | IPC applies to Indian citizens wherever offense committed. |
| Indian ships/aircraft as Indian territory | Offenses on Indian vessels/aircraft are under IPC jurisdiction. |
| No universal jurisdiction | IPC does not apply to foreigners committing offenses abroad. |
| Trial in India possible | Indian courts can try offenses committed abroad by Indian citizens. |
✅ Conclusion
Section 1(2) IPC empowers Indian courts to try offenses committed outside India by Indian citizens or on Indian vessels/aircraft.
This ensures that Indian citizens cannot evade criminal liability by committing offenses abroad.
Indian ships and aircraft are considered Indian soil for the purpose of criminal law.
Courts have upheld this principle consistently, reinforcing India’s legal sovereignty beyond territorial limits.
RELATED Blog
0 comments