Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 163
Power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger
(1) In cases where, in the opinion of a District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, there is sufficient ground for proceeding under this section and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable, such Magistrate may, by a written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 153, direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management, if such Magistrate considers that such direction is likely to prevent, or tends to prevent, obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety or a disturbance of the public tranquillity, or a riot, or an affray.
(2) An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is directed, be passed ex parte.
(3) An order under this section may be directed to a particular individual, or to persons residing in a particular place or area, or to the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place or area.
(4) No order under this section shall remain in force for more than two months from the making thereof: Provided that if the State Government considers it necessary so to do for preventing danger to human life, health or safety or for preventing a riot or any affray, it may, by notification, direct that an order made by a Magistrate under this section shall remain in force for such further period not exceeding six months from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate would have, but for such order, expired, as it may specify in the said notification.
(5) Any Magistrate may, either on his own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made under this section by himself or any Magistrate subordinate to him or by his predecessor-in-office.
(6) The State Government may, either on its own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made by it under the proviso to sub-section (4).
(7) Where an application under sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) is received, the Magistrate, or the State Government, as the case may be, shall afford to the applicant an early opportunity of appearing before him or it, either in person or by an advocate and showing cause against the order; and if the Magistrate or the State Government, as the case may be, rejects the application wholly or in part, he or it shall record in writing the reasons for so doing. D.—Disputes as to immovable property
Why this exists
This provision (earlier Section 144 of the CrPC, now Section 163 of the BNSS) exists to give local authorities a fast tool to prevent immediate public danger — like riots, health hazards, or violent clashes — without waiting for lengthy court processes. It dates back to colonial-era policing needs but has been retained because sudden crises (epidemics, communal tension, natural disasters) sometimes need instant administrative action rather than slow judicial proceedings.
How courts read it
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the predecessor provision in Madhu Limaye v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Monghyr (1970), ruling it wasn't an unreasonable restriction on free speech and assembly as long as used to prevent real, imminent danger. In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), concerning internet shutdowns in Jammu & Kashmir, the Court held that orders under this kind of provision must be proportionate, temporary, publicly disclosed, and subject to periodic review — reinforcing that such powers cannot be used indefinitely or arbitrarily.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: This provision (formerly Section 144 CrPC) bans all gatherings anywhere, anytime.
Fact: It only applies where a magistrate has specific grounds to believe there's urgent danger, and it must be limited in time, place, and scope, not a blanket nationwide ban. - Myth: Once such an order is issued, it can never be challenged or changed.
Fact: Sub-sections (5), (6), and (7) explicitly allow anyone affected to apply for the order to be cancelled or modified, with a fair hearing guaranteed. - Myth: The order can last indefinitely if authorities feel it's necessary.
Fact: The law caps it at two months, extendable by the State Government for a maximum of six more months — it cannot continue forever.