Any order signed by any court fully protects the person who follows it, no matter what.

Courts have clarified that the person must genuinely and reasonably believe the court had jurisdiction — protection is not automatic just because paperwork exists.

This section means courts can never be wrong about jurisdiction.

The section assumes courts can make jurisdictional errors; it only protects people who acted on such orders in good faith, not the court's decision itself.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 16

Act done pursuant to judgment or order of Court

Nothing which is done in pursuance of, or which is warranted by the judgment or order of, a Court; if done whilst such judgment or order remains in force, is an offence, notwithstanding the Court may have had no jurisdiction to pass such judgment or order, provided the person doing the act in good faith believes that the Court had such jurisdiction.§

Why this exists

This provision protects people — like police officers, jailers, or court officials — who carry out a judge's order in good faith. Courts sometimes make mistakes about their own jurisdiction, and it would be unfair to punish someone who simply obeyed a court order believing it was lawful. The rule encourages respect for court orders while still requiring genuine good faith, not blind or careless obedience. It continues a principle found in the earlier Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 78), carried forward into the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

How courts read it

Under the corresponding provision in the Indian Penal Code (Section 78), Indian courts have generally held that this protection is not automatic — the person must show actual good-faith belief in the court's jurisdiction, not just that an order existed. Courts have examined whether the person acted with due care and attention, and whether a reasonable person in that position would have believed the court was competent to pass such an order. Mere technical existence of an order does not protect someone who knew, or should have known, that the court had no power to issue it.

Common misconceptions

Myth: Any order signed by any court fully protects the person who follows it, no matter what.
Fact: Courts have clarified that the person must genuinely and reasonably believe the court had jurisdiction — protection is not automatic just because paperwork exists.
Myth: This section means courts can never be wrong about jurisdiction.
Fact: The section assumes courts can make jurisdictional errors; it only protects people who acted on such orders in good faith, not the court's decision itself.