What is the difference between intra-territorial and extra-territorial jurisdiction of Indian criminal law?

Introduction

• Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court or legal system to hear and decide cases, and it is a fundamental concept in criminal law. It ensures that individuals are held accountable for offenses within the defined boundaries of legal authority.
• The Indian Penal Code (IPC), enacted in 1860, forms the cornerstone of criminal law in India. It governs the punishment of offenses committed both within and, in certain cases, outside Indian territory.
• Understanding territorial jurisdiction is crucial as it defines the extent to which the IPC can be applied. This is primarily divided into intra-territorial jurisdiction, which pertains to offenses committed within India, and extra-territorial jurisdiction, which extends the reach of Indian law beyond its borders.
• In this article, we will explore the concepts of intra-territorial and extra-territorial jurisdiction under the IPC, outlining their scope, key differences, and real-world applications.

Intra-Territorial Jurisdiction

• Intra-territorial jurisdiction refers to the application of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to offenses committed within the geographical boundaries of India. This is the most fundamental form of jurisdiction, where the law applies based on the location of the crime.
• The scope of intra-territorial jurisdiction is vast, covering all offenses committed within India’s physical boundaries, which include its states, Union Territories, and maritime boundaries. This means that crimes committed on land, territorial waters, and airspace that belong to India fall under this jurisdiction.
• The principle of territoriality is the foundation of intra-territorial jurisdiction. It ensures that all acts or omissions occurring within Indian territory, regardless of the nationality of the offender, are punishable under Indian law.

Essentials of application of Intra - Territorial Jurisdiction

1.  Location of the Offense within Indian Borders

• Intra-territorial jurisdiction applies only when the offense is committed within India’s geographical boundaries. This includes all states, Union Territories, territorial waters, and airspace under Indian control.
• Crimes committed in these regions are governed by the IPC, regardless of the nationality of the offender.
• In Mobarik Ali Ahmed v. State of Bombay[1], the Supreme Court demonstrated how Indian jurisdiction could apply when an offense affects people or property within India. Although the accused was abroad, his fraudulent activities had direct consequences in India, thereby invoking intra-territorial jurisdiction. This case highlights that actions impacting India are subject to Indian law, even if committed remotely.

2. Application to all persons within India

• According to Section 2 of the IPC, intra-territorial jurisdiction ensures that any person within India, whether a citizen, foreign national, or stateless individual, is subject to Indian law for any offense committed within its borders.
• In State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George[2], a German national passing through India violated Indian customs regulations, asserting ignorance of Indian law as his defense. The Supreme Court ruled that all persons within India, irrespective of nationality, are subject to Indian law, emphasizing that jurisdiction applies uniformly to anyone within the country’s borders. This reflects the comprehensive nature of intra-territorial jurisdiction.

3.  Principle of Territoriality

• The principle of territoriality is the foundation of intra-territorial jurisdiction, which dictates that the law applies based on the location of the act or omission. This principle ensures that offenses occurring within India fall under the jurisdiction of Indian courts and the IPC.

4.  Inclusivity of Territorial Waters and Airspace

• Intra-territorial jurisdiction covers not only land but also India’s territorial waters (up to 12 nautical miles from the coastline) and airspace above its landmass and waters. This inclusion ensures comprehensive jurisdiction over crimes committed within any part of Indian territory.

5. Exclusivity of Jurisdiction within boundaries

• Indian law has exclusive jurisdiction over crimes committed within its borders, meaning no other country’s legal system can interfere with offenses committed within Indian territory.

6. Examples

• Theft in a public place within an Indian city, assault in an Indian state, or a crime committed by a foreigner in India all fall under intra-territorial jurisdiction and are tried under IPC provisions.

Extra - Territorial Jurisdiction

• Extra-territorial jurisdiction extends the reach of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) beyond the geographical boundaries of India. This allows Indian law to apply to certain individuals and situations even if the crime occurs outside Indian territory.
• The principle of nationality is the foundation of extra-territorial jurisdiction. It asserts that Indian citizens are subject to Indian law, irrespective of where they are located. This ensures that crimes committed by Indian nationals abroad can still be prosecuted under the IPC.

Essentials of Extra - Territorial Jurisdiction under IPC

1.  Application Beyond Indian Borders

• Extra-territorial jurisdiction allows the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to be applied to offenses committed outside India. This extension of jurisdiction ensures that certain offenses by Indian citizens, government officials, and specific cases involving Indian interests are punishable under Indian law, regardless of where they occur.

2. Application to Indian Citizens and Entities Abroad

• Under Section 4 of the IPC, Indian citizens are subject to Indian law even when they commit offenses outside India. This provision applies to Indian nationals, officials, and entities, holding them accountable for crimes regardless of location.
• It reflects the principle of nationality, meaning an individual’s obligations under Indian law extend internationally, especially in cases involving offenses against national interests.
• In Ajay Aggarwal v. Union of India[3],the Supreme Court affirmed that Indian citizens are subject to Indian law even for crimes committed abroad if those offenses impact India’s interests. Ajay Aggarwal, who plotted a conspiracy outside India with implications for national security, was held accountable under the IPC. This case reinforces the principle of extra-territorial jurisdiction, allowing India to prosecute its citizens for cross-border crimes that affect the nation.

3. Application to Offenses on Indian Ships and Aircraft

• Extra-territorial jurisdiction also covers offenses committed on Indian ships and aircraft, as outlined in Section 4 of the IPC. This ensures that crimes occurring on Indian-registered vessels or aircraft, irrespective of their location, are subject to Indian law.
• In MV Elisabeth v. Harwan Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., [4]the Supreme Court held that Indian jurisdiction applies to offenses or disputes on Indian-flagged ships, even in international waters. This ruling affirmed that Indian laws, including the IPC, extend to Indian-registered vessels globally, establishing a key principle of extra-territorial jurisdiction for protecting national assets beyond borders.

4.  Certain Offenses Affecting India’s Sovereignty and Security

• Extra-territorial jurisdiction extends to certain offenses that affect India’s sovereignty, security, or interests, even if these offenses are committed outside its borders. This applies to crimes such as terrorism, cybercrime, or offenses that impact India’s national interests or citizens. The focus is on protecting India’s global interests.

5. Principle of Universal Jurisdiction

• In specific cases, India’s extra-territorial jurisdiction is rooted in the principle of universal jurisdiction, allowing prosecution of serious offenses like piracy or war crimes. This principle asserts that some crimes are so severe they can be prosecuted universally, ensuring justice beyond borders.

6. Examples

• Examples include an Indian citizen committing fraud while abroad, piracy on an Indian-flagged ship in international waters, or an act of cybercrime targeting Indian citizens from a foreign country. Each of these instances invokes extra-territorial jurisdiction under the IPC.

Differences between Intra – Territorial and Extra - Territorial Jurisdiction

Changes in Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023

The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 brings several changes to intra-territorial and extra-territorial jurisdiction compared to the IPC.

Under Section 1(3) of the BNS, intra-territorial jurisdiction remains similar to the IPC, covering crimes within India’s territorial boundaries, including territorial waters up to 12 nautical miles from the coast. Extra-territorial jurisdiction under BNS, outlined in Sections 1(4) and 1(5), also largely maintains its reach, holding Indian citizens accountable for offenses committed abroad. However, new provisions expand this jurisdiction: Section 1(5)(c) specifically addresses crimes targeting computer systems located in India, even if the offense occurs outside the country. This inclusion reflects the growing significance of cybersecurity in Indian law, allowing Indian courts to prosecute foreign cyber offenders targeting Indian systems​.

These changes aim to enhance India's jurisdictional scope in an increasingly interconnected and digital world, ensuring protection against offenses that affect India's security and interests, whether committed by Indian nationals or those targeting Indian resources remotely.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the concepts of intra-territorial and extra-territorial jurisdiction under the IPC ensure that Indian law applies comprehensively within its borders and extends beyond them when necessary. While intra-territorial jurisdiction holds anyone committing an offense in India accountable, extra-territorial jurisdiction applies to Indian citizens and interests abroad, safeguarding national security and extending accountability. Together, these principles create a robust legal framework that protects India’s legal authority both domestically and internationally.

[1] AIR 1957 SC 857.

[2] 1965 AIR 722.

[3] 1993 AIR 1637.

[4] 1992 AIR 40.