What is Section 163 of BNSS? Understanding Its Powers, Restrictions and Impact on Protests

Why in News?

• Delhi Police has denied permission for protests planned by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Delhi on October 10 and 11, 2026, demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. 

• Authorities have also imposed Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in parts of the New Delhi district. 

• The provision replaced Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) after the BNSS came into force in 2024. 

What is Section 163 of BNSS?

• Section 163 is a preventive provision that allows an Executive Magistrate to issue written orders when immediate action is necessary to prevent a threat to public order. 

• It can be used to prevent: 

  • Riots and unlawful assemblies. 

  • Disturbance of public peace. 

  • Danger to human life, health or safety. 

  • Obstruction or serious public nuisance. 

• The order may regulate the conduct of individuals, groups or the use of certain property. 

• In urgent situations, an order can be issued without giving prior notice to the affected persons. 

Duration of the Order

• An order under Section 163 generally remains in force for up to two months. 

• The State Government can extend it for a further period, subject to the limits prescribed by law. 

Impact on Residents

• Residents of an affected area may face restrictions on: 

  • Public gatherings and demonstrations. 

  • Movement or specific activities, depending on the order. 

  • Use of certain public spaces or property.

• Section 163 does not automatically mean that all movement or gatherings are prohibited. The restrictions depend on the specific order issued by the competent authority. 

Why is it Controversial?

• Although intended for emergencies, its predecessor, Section 144 CrPC, was sometimes used for routine administrative purposes. 

• A 2023 study of Delhi's Section 144 orders found that only a small proportion directly restricted unlawful assemblies, while many orders dealt with issues such as CCTV installation, record-keeping and tenant verification. 

• Repeated renewal of such orders has raised concerns about converting an emergency power into a routine administrative mechanism. 

What has the Supreme Court Said?

• In Babulal Parate v. State of Maharashtra (1961), the Supreme Court upheld Section 144 but held that the power was not unlimited and had to be linked to the circumstances specified by law. 

• In In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012), the Court stressed that Section 144 should be used in grave and immediate situations, rather than as an ordinary administrative measure. 

• In Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018), the Court rejected a blanket prohibition on demonstrations at Jantar Mantar and emphasised the need to balance public order with the right to peaceful protest. 

Constitutional Significance

• Restrictions imposed under Section 163 must be consistent with fundamental rights, particularly: 

  • Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression. 

  • Article 19(1)(b): Right to assemble peacefully and without arms. 

• Such restrictions should satisfy the principles of necessity, reasonableness and proportionality. 

Practice Question

Q. Consider the following statements regarding Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS):

1. It replaced Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after the BNSS came into force. 

2. An order under Section 163 automatically prohibits all public gatherings and movement in the affected area. 

3. The Supreme Court has held that the preventive power associated with Section 144 should be used in grave and immediate situations rather than as a routine administrative measure. 

4. Restrictions under Section 163 may affect the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b). 

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1, 2 and 4 only 
(c) 2 and 4 only
(d) 1, 3 and 4 only

 

Answer: (b) 

Explanation

• Statement 1 is correct. Section 163 of the BNSS replaced Section 144 of the CrPC after the BNSS came into force. Hence, Statement 1 is Correct. 

• Statement 2 is incorrect. Section 163 does not automatically prohibit all public gatherings or movement. The restrictions depend on the specific order issued by the competent authority. Hence, Statement 2 is Incorrect. 

• Statement 3 is correct. In In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012), the Supreme Court held that Section 144 should be used in grave and immediate situations rather than as an ordinary administrative measure. Hence, Statement 3 is Correct. 

• Statement 4 is correct. Restrictions under Section 163 may affect the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to assemble peacefully under Article 19(1)(b). Hence, Statement 4 is Correct.