Section 163 BNSS: the old 144, and how to use it

Everyone still calls it “144”. Since 1 July 2024 it is Section 163 of the BNSS, and as an RDO — that is, as Sub-Divisional Magistrate — it is the most consequential order you will sign. It is also the order most likely to be read aloud in a courtroom two months later, which is why the drafting discipline matters as much as the power.

Who may pass it, and against whom

Where immediate prevention or a speedy remedy is desirable, the District Magistrate, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government may, by written order, direct:

• any person to abstain from a certain act, or
• to take certain order with respect to property in his possession or under his management,

if the Magistrate considers that the direction is likely to prevent — and the statute lists the heads exhaustively — obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed; danger to human life, health or safety; disturbance of the public tranquillity; or a riot or an affray.

The order may be directed at a named individual, at persons residing in a particular place or area, or at the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place or area. That last form is the classic area-wide prohibitory order: assemblies of five or more persons banned within the limits of a mandal for a fortnight, carrying of weapons prohibited along a procession route, drone flight barred near a venue.

Note what the section does not require: no prior notice, no hearing before issue. In cases of emergency, or where circumstances do not admit of serving notice in due time, the order may be passed ex parte. The balance is restored afterwards: any person aggrieved may apply to the Magistrate (or the State Government, where it made or extended the order) to rescind or alter it, and on that application is entitled to a hearing — either in person or by pleader — and to reasons if the application is rejected in whole or part.

The clock

A s. 163 order dies of its own force two months from the date it is made. The State Government — not the DM, not the SDM — may, by notification, extend a particular order where necessary to prevent danger to human life, health or safety, or a riot or affray, up to a maximum of six months from the date the original order would otherwise have expired. In practice extension is rare; the working pattern is that a fresh situation gets a fresh order with fresh recitals. What the courts will not accept is the photocopied perpetual order — the same text re-issued every two months for years, converting an emergency power into standing local legislation.

The electronic-communication extension

BNSS 163 expressly reaches acts and communications carried out by electronic means — the statutory footing for orders directed at inflammatory messaging, bulk-forwarded rumours and provocation over social media in a communally sensitive window. Two cautions. First, an internet shutdown proper is not made under this section alone: suspension of telecom services follows the Telecom-law suspension rules and their own competent-authority chain; s. 163 supports the narrower, conduct-directed order. Second, an order aimed at electronic communication needs the same specificity as any other — the class of act prohibited, the area, the period — or it will read as censorship at large.

Enforcement

Disobedience of a duly promulgated s. 163 order is prosecuted under BNS s. 223 (the successor of IPC 188 — disobedience of an order promulgated by a public servant). The police register the case; your role is to have made an order capable of supporting one — promulgated, specific, and in force on the date of the violation. Promulgation matters: an order the violator could not have known about will not sustain a prosecution, which is why service, dandora, press notes and station-wise circulation are part of the drafting job, not an afterthought.

A worked example: the Chintagattu procession

Take a mandal in erstwhile Warangal — call the village Chintagattu — where the annual Hanuman Shobha Yatra route passes a prayer hall, and where last year’s procession ended in stone-pelting and eleven injuries. Fifteen days before this year’s date, the SHO’s report lands with the RDO: both organising committees have announced enlarged processions, provocative posts are circulating in village WhatsApp groups, and the DSP apprehends a repeat.

The RDO’s file, done properly, runs like this:

1. Peace committee first. Both committees are called to the kacheri; the routes, timings and sound levels they agree to are recorded in minutes. Agreement is the best outcome; the order then merely holds people to it.
2. The order. A s. 163 order in writing, reciting the material facts — last year’s incident by crime number, the police report of 8 August, the specific posts and the apprehension they found — and then directing, for the area of Chintagattu village and a stated buffer, from 6 a.m. on the festival day to 6 a.m. the following day: processions only along the annexed route; no halts within 100 metres of the prayer hall; loudspeakers off between stated hours; carrying of weapons, sticks and glass bottles prohibited; assemblies of five or more outside the permitted procession prohibited; and circulation of messages inciting violence in respect of the procession prohibited, including by electronic means.
3. Promulgation. Served on both committee presidents against acknowledgment; published by dandora in the village; copies to the SHO, the Tahsildar and the press note to local media, all recorded on file.
4. The rescission application. One committee applies to shift the no-halt line, saying it swallows their traditional darshan stop. The RDO hears them the next morning — they are entitled to that — and alters the order to permit a five-minute halt with sound off, recording reasons. The alteration strengthens the order: it shows a Magistrate exercising judgment, not rubber-stamping the police draft.
5. The event, and the lapse. The procession passes. Two men who break the weapon prohibition are booked under BNS 223 on the strength of the order. The order then simply expires; nothing further is issued, because nothing further is apprehended.

Every element a revisional court looks for is on this file: recited facts, defined area, defined period, proportionate terms, promulgation, and a hearing given when sought.

Edge cases and common mistakes

• The unreasoned recital. “As law and order is likely to be disturbed” — with no facts — is how s. 163 orders die in revision and in writ. The section itself demands a written order stating the material facts. Recite the police report by date, the incident by crime number, the specific apprehension.
• The number trap. In the BNSS, s. 144 is maintenance of wives, children and parents (the old CrPC 125) — a Judicial Magistrate subject. A bandobast order citing “s. 144 BNSS” cites the wrong law entirely. The prohibitory power is 163.
• The wrong instrument. A possession fight over land likely to breach the peace is s. 164 territory — a different proceeding with written statements and a possession finding. A named troublemaker who needs a bond is ss. 126–129. Using 163 to freeze a private land dispute is the classic misuse, and the classic ground of challenge.
• The vanished 144A. The CrPC’s specific DM power to prohibit carrying arms in processions and mass drills (s. 144A) has no BNSS equivalent. The mischief is now reached through the general s. 163 power (as in the worked example) and the Arms Act.
• The rolling order. Re-issuing the identical order every two months, division-wide, indefinitely, converts an emergency power into permanent policy. Courts read that as abuse; each order needs its own live apprehension.
• Extension by the wrong hand. Only the State Government can extend beyond two months, by notification. An SDM’s “extension endorsement” is a nullity.
• No promulgation. An order that never left the file cannot support a BNS 223 prosecution. Service, dandora and publication are conditions of the order’s practical life.

Questions you’ll actually get

“Sir, the SP’s office has sent a draft 144 order for the exam season — shall I just sign it?” Read it as your own order, because in law it is. Check that the facts recited are real and current, that the area and period are defined and no wider than the apprehension, and that it cites s. 163 BNSS, not 144. Then sign — or send it back.

“Can the order name our rival committee alone and leave ours free?” An order can be directed at named individuals where the apprehension is specific to them. But an order that regulates one community’s procession and ignores the mirror-image conduct of the other invites a discrimination challenge. Where both sides present the same risk, the terms should bind both.

“The order has expired but the tension hasn’t. Can I extend it?” You cannot; only the State Government can, up to six months total, and only by notification. What you can do is pass a fresh order — with fresh recitals showing the apprehension is still live, not a photocopy of the last one.

“Someone forwarded the banned message after the order — what happens to him?” If the order was in force, promulgated, and covered electronic circulation in its terms, the police can book him under BNS 223. Your contribution to that prosecution was made when you drafted and promulgated the order properly.

“Is a blanket ban on all assemblies in the whole district legal?” The wider the area and the more absolute the terms, the stronger the facts must be. A district-wide, all-purpose ban resting on a routine apprehension is exactly the order courts strike down. Match the geography of the order to the geography of the risk.

Field notes for a probationer

Sit with the RDO’s peshkar and read the last three s. 163 orders issued in the division against this checklist: are the material facts recited, is the section number right, is the area defined, is the duration stated, is promulgation recorded on the file? The gap between the statute and the templates in circulation is itself an education — and the template you draft to close that gap will outlive your posting.