PART I
Preventive action of the police
1. PREVENTION OF COGNIZABLE OFFENCES
Under Part I of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding the preventive action of police, Section 168 obligates every police officer to actively intervene to the best of their ability to prevent the occurrence of cognizable offenses.
Section 169 reinforces this duty by making it mandatory for an officer who receives intelligence about a planned cognizable crime to immediately pass this information to superior officers and relevant prevention authorities.
Furthermore, under Section 170(1) and (2) BNSS, a police officer is empowered to make a preventive arrest without a judicial warrant or magistrate’s order if there is no other practical way to stop the planned crime from being committed.
To protect civil liberties, the statute enforces a strict 24-hour limit on such preventive detention without separate judicial authorization, while ensuring that all legal safeguards governing warrantless arrests remain fully applicable to prevent the execution of intended crimes.
2. PREVENTION OF INJURY TO PUBLIC PROPERTY
Under Section 171 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), a police officer is empowered on their own authority to intervene directly to prevent damage to any public property, as well as the removal or destruction of public landmarks and navigation markers.
To support these preventive efforts, Section 172(1) BNSS mandates that all citizens must comply with the lawful instructions given by police officers to prevent cognizable crimes and protect public property.
Furthermore, Section 172(2) BNSS authorizes officers to detain or remove anyone who refuses to obey these directions, with the option to present the individual before a Magistrate or release them within 24 hours in minor cases.
PART II
Security proceedings
1. SECURITY FOR KEEPING THE PEACE
Under Part II of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding security proceedings, Section 126 provides Executive Magistrates with preventive authority to preserve public tranquility.
When a Magistrate receives information that an individual is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disrupt public order, Section 126(1) BNSS allows them to require that individual to show cause why they should not execute a bond or bail bond to maintain peace for a period of up to one year.
Under Section 126(2) BNSS, jurisdiction lies wherever the apprehended disturbance is located or where the individual resides.
Because these preventive measures curtail personal liberty prior to any criminal conviction, the law requires strict procedural adherence, with the essential prerequisite (sine qua non) being that the Magistrate forms a well-founded opinion of sufficient grounds based on information gathered from public or private sources, while subsequent enforcement procedures and non-compliance consequences are governed under Sections 130 to 143 BNSS.
2. SECURITY FOR GOOD BEHAVIOUR
Sections 127 to 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) establish preventive measures requiring security for good behavior from specific classes of persons, including those spreading objectionable material, suspected persons, and habitual offenders.
These proceedings can be initiated either by police reports or by private individuals and carry procedural traits similar to regular criminal trials.
Consequently, while preventive matters are frequently handled by executive authorities, Section 524 BNSS empowers State Governments to specifically authorize Judicial Magistrates of the First Class to conduct and adjudicate proceedings under Sections 127 through 129 BNSS under designated circumstances.
(1) Proceedings against persons disseminating certain matters.
Section 127 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) empowers Executive Magistrates to take preventive action against individuals within their jurisdiction who spread or attempt to spread material that threatens national security, social harmony, public decency, or judicial independence.
Specifically, if a person intentionally disseminates content that endangers national sovereignty (Section 152 Nyaya Sanhita), promotes group enmity (Section 196), threatens national integration (Section 197), or insults religious feelings (Section 299), or circulates obscene content (Section 294) or defamatory material targeting judges, the Magistrate can require them to execute a good behavior bond for a period not exceeding one year.
Crucially, while intent must be proven for state and communal offenses, it is not required for matters affecting judges or obscene publications; additionally, Section 127(2) BNSS safeguards press freedom by requiring explicit State Government permission before initiating such proceedings against registered editors, printers, or publishers.
(2) Proceedings against suspected persons.
Under Section 128 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an Executive Magistrate is empowered to initiate preventive security proceedings against any suspected individual within their local jurisdiction who is actively taking precautions to conceal their presence with the intent to commit a cognizable offense.
When information leads the Magistrate to reasonably believe that such concealment is tied to an intended crime, the Magistrate can order the person to show cause why they should not execute a bond or bail bond ensuring good behavior for a fixed period not exceeding one year.
This provision acts as a legal mechanism to intercept potential criminal activity before it occurs while maintaining judicial oversight through formal show-cause proceedings.
(3) Proceedings against habitual offenders.
Section 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) provides Executive Magistrates with preventive powers to require habitual offenders and dangerous individuals within their jurisdiction to execute a bail bond for good behavior for a period not exceeding three years.
This section covers a broad spectrum of repeat offenses, including habitual theft, robbery, forgery, harboring criminals, kidnapping, extortion, currency fraud under Chapter X of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, breaches of public peace, violations of special socio-economic statutes (such as customs, food safety, essential commodities, and anti-corruption laws), and individuals deemed too dangerous to remain at large without security.
Unlike Sections 127 and 128 BNSS, Section 129 explicitly mandates a bail bond rather than a simple personal bond, and judicial standards require that the information relied upon by the Magistrate must consist of specific factual evidence of habitual criminality rather than vague police characterizations.
3. PRELIMINARY PROCEDURE FOR INITIATING ACTION UNDER SECTIONS 130 TO 134 BNSS
(1) Order requiring the respondent to show cause.
Under Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an Executive Magistrate initiating preventive security proceedings under Sections 126, 127, 128, or 129 BNSS must issue a mandatory written order directing the respondent to show cause.
To satisfy principles of natural justice and constitutional due process, this written order must clearly state the essential substance of the information received against the person, the financial amount of the bond, its duration, and the required number and fitness of sureties.
Because Section 130 BNSS acts as the foundational basis of the Magistrate’s jurisdiction, providing the person with the core facts needed to defend themselves, any failure to adhere to these statutory drafting requirements will vitiate the preliminary order and render the entire proceeding legally invalid.
(2) Communication of the order.
Sections 131 to 133 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) lay down the essential rules for properly communicating a show-cause order to a respondent.
When the individual is present in court, Section 131 mandates that the order be read aloud or explained to them, as failure to fulfill this requirement constitutes a legal irregularity that vitiates the proceedings.
If the person is absent or currently in custody, Section 132 dictates that the Magistrate must issue a summons or a production warrant respectively.
However, under the proviso to Section 132, if there is an urgent threat of a breach of peace that can only be averted by immediate detention, the Magistrate may record the information and issue an arrest warrant directly.
Finally, Section 133 ensures procedural fairness by requiring that a copy of the written show-cause order under Section 130 be delivered alongside any summons or warrant executed.
(3) Personal attendance can be dispensed with.
Under Section 134 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an Executive Magistrate possesses the discretionary authority to exempt a person summoned under preventive show-cause proceedings from appearing in court in person.
Provided there is sufficient cause demonstrated, the Magistrate may dispense with the individual’s physical presence and permit them to be legally represented by an advocate instead.
This provision balances procedural requirements with fairness, ensuring that individuals facing preventive proceedings can present their defense through legal counsel without enduring unnecessary hardship or mandatory physical appearance when valid reasons exist.
4. INQUIRY AS TO TRUTH OF INFORMATION
Section 135 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) governs the judicial inquiry process used by Executive Magistrates to test the truth of allegations before executing preventive security bonds.
Conducted similarly to a summons trial, the inquiry commences when the respondent appears in court and disputes the allegations or files a show-cause response.
While the general standard of evidence applies, Section 135(4) exceptionally allows evidence of general reputation to establish habitual or dangerous criminal behavior.
To handle emergency threats during an ongoing inquiry, the Magistrate holds conditional authority under Section 135(3) to order an interim bond upon recording written reasons, provided a prima facie case exists and the terms do not exceed the initial show-cause notice.
To protect liberty, Section 135(6) imposes a strict six-month limitation period: if the inquiry is not completed within six months (or six months of continuous detention), the proceeding automatically terminates unless extended for recorded special reasons before the expiration, which remains subject to judicial review by a Sessions Judge.
5. RESULT OF THE INQUIRY
(1) Order to give security.
Section 136 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) details the outcomes of a preventive inquiry, authorizing an Executive Magistrate to issue a final order requiring a person to execute a bond or bail bond if the inquiry confirms that security is necessary to preserve public peace or good behavior.
The section sets strict statutory limits: the final bond cannot exceed the duration, monetary amount, or change the nature of security outlined in the initial Section 130 show-cause notice.
Furthermore, the financial amount must remain reasonable relative to the case context rather than excessive, and in cases involving a minor, the security bond must be executed solely by sureties.
(2) Discharge.
Under Section 137 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an Executive Magistrate must formally discharge a person if the inquiry conducted under Section 135 fails to prove that executing a bond is necessary to keep the peace or maintain good behavior.
When such a determination is reached, the Magistrate makes a formal entry on the record, leading to the immediate release of the individual if held in custody solely for the inquiry, or a full discharge if they are not in custody.
Furthermore, in deciding whether to discharge, the court is entitled to evaluate events occurring after the initial preliminary order was issued; if subsequent occurrences indicate that any initial threat of a breach of peace has disappeared, the Magistrate may drop the proceedings and discharge the respondent accordingly.
6. CONTENTS OF BOND AND ITS COMMENCEMENT
(1) Contents of bond.
Under Section 139 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an individual ordered to execute a bond or bail bond under Section 125 or Section 136 BNSS is legally bound to either preserve public peace or maintain good behavior.
Where a bond is executed for maintaining good behavior, committing, attempting to commit, or abetting any offense punishable by imprisonment anywhere directly constitutes a breach of the bond or bail bond.
To ensure statutory compliance, such legal undertakings must be executed using the prescribed Form 13 or Form 14 as laid down in the Second Schedule of the BNSS.
(2) Commencement of the period of security.
Under Section 138 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), specific statutory rules govern when a period of security ordered under Section 125 or Section 136 BNSS takes effect.
If the individual is serving a prison sentence or is sentenced to imprisonment when the order is made, Section 138(1) specifies that the security period shall commence only upon the full expiration of that sentence.
In all other circumstances, Section 138(2) dictates that the security period begins on the date the order is issued, though the Magistrate retains the discretion to specify a later commencement date provided there are sufficient reasons recorded.
7. POWER TO REJECT SURETIES
Section 140 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) grants Executive Magistrates the authority to refuse or reject any surety—whether newly offered or previously accepted—if they are found unfit for the purposes of a bail bond.
To prevent arbitrary rejections, the law mandates a strict inquiry process: the Magistrate must issue reasonable notice to both the surety and the bound individual, hold an inquiry under oath (or depute a subordinate Magistrate to report), and formally record the evidence.
If the evidence establishes unfitness, the Magistrate must issue a reasoned order in writing.
Furthermore, before revoking a previously accepted surety, the Magistrate must issue a summons or warrant to bring the bound person before the court.
While judicial precedents note that a surety’s inability to exercise complete control over the accused is not by itself a ground for rejection, the capacity to exercise effective control remains an essential factor evaluated during fitness inquiries in specific contexts.
8. IMPRISONMENT IN DEFAULT OF SECURITY
Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) outlines the statutory consequences and procedures when an individual defaults on or breaches security requirements ordered by a Magistrate.
Under Section 141(1), failure to furnish security on time results in imprisonment until the security period expires or until security is provided, while breaching an existing peace bond allows the Magistrate to record proof and order detention for the remaining bond period without affecting other penalties.
Where security is ordered for more than one year and defaulted upon, Sections 141(2) through (5) require the Magistrate to commit the person to detention while submitting the proceedings for review by the Sessions Judge (or an Additional Sessions Judge), who may order imprisonment up to a maximum limit of three years after hearing the party.
If security is later submitted directly to jail authorities under Section 141(6), it must be forwarded to the issuing court immediately.
Finally, Sections 141(7) and (8) specify that default imprisonment for keeping the peace (or good behavior under Section 127) must be simple, whereas default for good behavior under Section 128 or 129 may be simple or rigorous based on judicial discretion.
9. POWER TO RELEASE PERSONS IMPRISONED FOR FAILING TO GIVE SECURITY
Section 142 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) outlines the authority and procedures for discharging individuals imprisoned for failing to give security, modifying bond conditions, and managing sureties.
Under Section 142(1), the District Magistrate (for Executive Magistrate orders) or Chief Judicial Magistrate (for other cases) may discharge a detained person conditionally or unconditionally if their release poses no hazard to the public.
If release conditions are breached, Section 142(5)–(8) empowers authorities to cancel the discharge, arrest the person without a warrant, and remand them to complete the unexpired security period, while allowing them to secure release at any point by furnishing the required security.
To prevent undue hardship, Section 142(2) allows the High Court, Sessions Court, DM, or CJM to reduce the security amount, duration, or required number of sureties, while Section 142(9) grants authority to cancel bonds entirely for recorded reasons.
Finally, Section 142(10) provides a mechanism for sureties to request discharge from their obligations at any time, requiring the court to summon or arrest the bound person to address the bond’s status.
10. SECURITY FOR THE UNEXPIRED PERIOD OF THE BOND
Under Section 143 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), when a Magistrate rejects a previously accepted surety under Section 140(3) or when a surety applies for discharge under Section 142(10), the court must cancel the existing bond or bail bond upon the person’s appearance via summons or warrant.
Section 143(1) mandates that the person be ordered to furnish fresh security of the same description to cover the remaining unexpired portion of the original bond term.
Furthermore, under Section 143(2), this order for fresh security holds the same legal standing as an original order issued under Section 125 or Section 136 BNSS, rendering all applicable provisions governing bond contents, commencement, surety fitness, and default consequences under Sections 139 to 142 BNSS fully enforceable.
11. APPEALS
Under Section 414 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an individual who has been ordered under Section 136 BNSS to provide security for keeping the peace or maintaining good behavior, or who is aggrieved by an order refusing or rejecting a surety under Section 140 BNSS, has the right to appeal to the Sessions Court.
However, this appeal mechanism under Section 414 is not available to individuals whose cases are already submitted directly to the Sessions Judge for review under Section 141(2) or (4) regarding imprisonment in default of security.
Furthermore, although Section 414 BNSS does not contain a specific clause to stay the operation of an order during an appeal, judicial precedent affirms that the appellate court may grant a stay under Section 427 BNSS.
PART III
Dispersal of unlawful assemblies
1. DISPERSAL OF UNLAWFUL OR POTENTIALLY UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLIES
(1) Use of civil force.
Under Section 148 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), an Executive Magistrate, Station House Officer, or Sub-Inspector (in the SHO’s absence) has the legal power to order the dispersal of an unlawful assembly or any gathering of five or more persons likely to disrupt public peace.
If the assembly fails to comply with the command or shows a clear refusal to leave, the authorized officers are permitted to use civil force, command assistance from civilians (excluding armed forces personnel), and arrest or detain members of the assembly.
For civil force to be legally justified, three conditions must be satisfied: the existence of a qualifying assembly, an explicit command to disperse, and a subsequent refusal by the assembly to disperse.
Furthermore, courts maintain strict oversight over executive actions, establishing that unauthorized or unwarranted police firing will result in state-funded compensation to the victim’s dependents.
(2) Use of Armed Forces.
Under Section 149 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), when an unlawful assembly cannot be dispersed by civil force and public security requires its immediate dispersal, a present District Magistrate or an authorized Executive Magistrate may call upon the Armed Forces for assistance.
Under Section 149(1) and 149(2), the Magistrate can require the commanding officer of an Armed Forces unit to disperse the gathering and arrest or detain participants as necessary to restore order or prosecute offenders.
According to Section 149(3), while the military officer is obligated to obey the requisition and retains operational discretion on the method of execution, they are strictly mandated to use the least amount of force possible and cause minimal damage to persons and property consistent with dispersing the assembly and apprehending offenders.
(3) Power of certain Armed Force officers to disperse assembly.
Under Section 150 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), a commissioned or gazetted officer of the Armed Forces is granted emergency authority to disperse an unlawful or dangerous assembly independently when public security is manifestly endangered and communication with an Executive Magistrate is impossible.
In such critical scenarios, the officer may deploy the forces under their command to disperse the assembly and arrest or detain participants as necessary to restore public order or pursue legal action.
However, this independent military authority is strictly temporary; the officer is legally obligated to establish contact with an Executive Magistrate as soon as it becomes practicable and must immediately abide by the Magistrate’s directions regarding whether to continue or halt the intervention.
2. PROTECTION AGAINST PROSECUTION FOR ACTS DONE FOR THE DISPERSAL OF UNLAWFUL OR POTENTIALLY UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLIES
Under Section 151 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), comprehensive legal immunity and protection against prosecution are granted to individuals involved in dispersing unlawful assemblies.
Section 151(2) establishes that Executive Magistrates, police officers, private citizens aiding upon requisition, Armed Forces officers acting in good faith under Section 150, and military personnel obeying mandatory orders shall not be deemed to have committed an offence.
To further guard against frivolous or retaliatory legal actions, Section 151(1) mandates that no criminal court may entertain a prosecution for acts performed under Sections 148, 149, or 150 BNSS without prior official authorization—requiring sanction from the Central Government for military personnel and from the State Government for all other individuals.