Generally, no — a Sessions Court in Hyderabad cannot directly take cognizance of an offence in the ordinary course, because the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita establishes a structured hierarchy where cognizance is normally taken first by a Magistrate, and the case is committed to the Sessions Court only if it involves an offence triable exclusively by that court, such as murder or other grave crimes. This is an important procedural safeguard, and understanding it correctly can prevent confusion about where and how a criminal case should actually begin in Hyderabad.

There are, however, specific and limited exceptions where a Sessions Court does take direct cognizance. Certain special statutes — such as the Prevention of Corruption Act, laws relating to atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and a few other specialised enactments — expressly designate a Sessions Court or a Special Court of equivalent status as the court of first instance, bypassing the usual Magistrate-to-Sessions Court committal process. If your case falls under one of these special statutes, direct cognizance by the Sessions Court is entirely lawful and, in fact, the correct legal procedure.

Outside these exceptions, if a complaint has been directly filed before a Sessions Court and cognizance taken without proper committal from a Magistrate, this is a significant procedural irregularity that can be challenged. Such a challenge is typically raised through a revision petition before the High Court, or through a quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS, arguing that the Sessions Court lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance in the first instance. Courts treat this as a serious jurisdictional defect, since the committal process serves the important function of filtering cases and ensuring a preliminary judicial screening before matters reach the higher trial court.

If you are unsure whether the Sessions Court handling your Hyderabad matter had the legal authority to take direct cognizance, this is worth examining carefully at the earliest stage of proceedings, because raising a jurisdictional objection later, after substantial trial has proceeded, becomes procedurally more difficult, even though such defects can sometimes still be raised on appeal. Getting an early, accurate reading of your case's procedural posture is where our legal experts at Aapka Legal Advice can add real clarity.

Because jurisdictional questions require precise knowledge of which offences fall under special statutes versus the ordinary committal process, experienced criminal lawyers are essential to spot and act on this issue promptly. The Top Criminal Lawyers in Hyderabad | Aapka Legal Advice team, supported by retired judges on our panel who have presided over Sessions Court matters, can help you assess whether cognizance in your case was properly taken. If you have concerns about how your Hyderabad case reached the Sessions Court, timely legal review of this jurisdictional question is strongly advisable.