CHAPTER IX: SECURITY FOR KEEPING THE PEACE AND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOUR
Section 125: Security for keeping peace on conviction
Sub-section (1): When Order Can Be Made
Explanation: When a Court of Session or a Magistrate of the First Class convicts a person for specific offences (listed in sub-section 2) or for abetting (helping commit) such offences, AND the court believes it’s necessary to take security from that person to ensure they keep the peace in the future, the court can issue an order.
Timing: This order is given at the time of passing the sentence for the conviction.
Requirement: The order requires the convicted person to execute a bond (personal promise) or a bail bond (promise with surety) to keep the peace.
Duration: The bond duration is decided by the court but cannot exceed three years.
Example: Mr. R is convicted by a Magistrate First Class for assault (an offence listed below). Believing Mr. R has a tendency towards violence, the Magistrate, while sentencing him for the assault, also orders him to sign a bond promising to keep the peace for the next two years.
Sub-section (2): Applicable Offences
Explanation: Lists the categories of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, conviction for which can trigger an order under sub-section (1):
(a) Offences against public tranquility (Chapter XI of BNS), excluding specific sections related to unlawful assembly membership (Sec 193(1), 196, 197).
(b) Offences involving assault, criminal force, or mischief.
(c) Offence of criminal intimidation.
(d) Any other offence that caused, or was intended/likely to cause, a breach of the peace.
Example: Convictions for rioting (Chapter XI BNS), simple assault (Sec 115(2) BNS), causing damage to property (mischief, Sec 324 BNS), or threatening someone (criminal intimidation, Sec 351 BNS) could all lead to an order requiring a peace bond.
Sub-section (3): Effect of Conviction Being Overturned
Explanation: If the original conviction (which led to the peace bond order) is later set aside (e.g., on appeal), the bond executed becomes void (cancelled and no longer legally binding).
Example: Mr. R appeals his assault conviction. The appellate court acquits him. The two-year peace bond he signed automatically becomes void.
Sub-section (4): Order by Appellate/Revisional Court
Explanation: An order requiring a peace bond under this section can also be made by an Appellate Court (while hearing an appeal) or by a court exercising its powers of revision.
Example: Even if the trial court didn’t order a peace bond, the High Court, while upholding a conviction for criminal intimidation on appeal, could add an order requiring the appellant to execute a peace bond if it deems it necessary.
Section 126: Security for keeping peace in other cases
Sub-section (1): Initiation by Executive Magistrate
Explanation: This section deals with situations before a conviction. When an Executive Magistrate (like a DM, SDM, or other empowered EM) receives information suggesting that a person is likely to:
Commit a breach of the peace, OR
Disturb public tranquility, OR
Do any wrongful act that might probably cause such breach or disturbance, AND the Magistrate believes there are sufficient grounds to proceed, they can take action.
Action: The Magistrate can issue an order requiring the person to show cause (explain why not) they should not be ordered to execute a bond (personal promise) or bail bond (promise with surety) for keeping the peace.
Duration: The bond duration decided by the Magistrate cannot exceed one year.
Example: An Executive Magistrate receives a police report detailing credible information that Mr. P is planning to instigate violence between two community groups in the locality. The Magistrate, believing action is needed, issues an order asking Mr. P to appear and explain why he shouldn’t be required to sign a bond promising to keep the peace for the next six months.
Sub-section (2): Jurisdiction
Explanation: Proceedings under this section can be initiated by an Executive Magistrate if:
The place where the breach of peace or disturbance is apprehended is within their local jurisdiction, OR
The person likely to cause the breach/disturbance is currently within their local jurisdiction (even if the anticipated trouble is expected to happen elsewhere).
Example 1: If the potential violence involving Mr. P is expected to occur in Area A, the Executive Magistrate of Area A can initiate proceedings.
Example 2: If Mr. P resides in Area A but is known to be planning trouble in neighbouring Area B, the Executive Magistrate of Area A can still initiate proceedings against Mr. P while he is within Area A.
Section 127: Security for good behaviour from persons disseminating certain matters
Sub-section (1): Grounds for Action
Explanation: An Executive Magistrate can initiate proceedings if they receive information that someone within their local jurisdiction is involved (inside or outside the jurisdiction) in intentionally disseminating (spreading), attempting to disseminate, or abetting the dissemination of:
(i)(a): Matter punishable under specific BNS sections: Sec 152 (acts endangering sovereignty/integrity), Sec 196 (promoting enmity), Sec 197 (assertions prejudicial to national integration), or Sec 299 (deliberate acts to outrage religious feelings).
(i)(b): Matter concerning a Judge (acting in official duty) which amounts to criminal intimidation or defamation under the BNS.
(ii): Any obscene matter (making, selling, distributing, exhibiting, etc.) as referred to in Section 294 of the BNS.
Condition: The Magistrate must be of the opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding.
Action: The Magistrate can issue an order requiring the person to show cause why they should not be ordered to execute a bond (personal promise) or bail bond (promise with surety) for their good behaviour.
Duration: The bond duration decided by the Magistrate cannot exceed one year.
Example: An Executive Magistrate receives information that Ms. Q, residing in his jurisdiction, is actively distributing pamphlets containing material intended to incite hatred against a specific community (punishable under Sec 196 BNS). The Magistrate issues a show cause notice asking Ms. Q why she shouldn’t execute a bond for good behaviour for one year.
Sub-section (2): Exception for Registered Publications
Explanation: No proceedings under this section can be taken against the editor, proprietor, printer, or publisher of a publication registered under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (if edited, printed, and published according to its rules) regarding matter in that publication, unless it is ordered or authorized by the State Government or an officer empowered by the State Government. This provides some protection for formal media publications from arbitrary action under this section, requiring higher government approval.
Example: If the allegedly offensive material appeared in a registered newspaper, the Executive Magistrate cannot directly initiate proceedings against the editor under Sec 127. They would likely need authorization from the State Government first.
Section 128: Security for good behaviour from suspected persons
Explanation: An Executive Magistrate can initiate proceedings if they receive information that a person within their local jurisdiction is:
Taking precautions to conceal their presence, AND
There is reason to believe they are doing so with the intention of committing a cognizable offence.
Action: The Magistrate can issue an order requiring the person to show cause why they should not be ordered to execute a bond (personal promise) or bail bond (promise with surety) for their good behaviour.
Duration: The bond duration decided by the Magistrate cannot exceed one year.
Example: Police inform an Executive Magistrate that Mr. S has recently arrived in town, is staying secretly, changing locations frequently, and has been seen suspiciously scouting bank premises late at night. The Magistrate, believing Mr. S might be planning a robbery (cognizable offence), issues a show cause notice asking him why he shouldn’t furnish a bond for good behaviour for six months.
Section 129: Security for good behaviour from habitual offenders
Explanation: An Executive Magistrate can initiate proceedings if they receive information that a person within their local jurisdiction falls into any of the following categories (based on habit):
(a) Habitual robber, house-breaker, thief, or forger.
(b) Habitual receiver of stolen property (knowing it’s stolen).
(c) Habitually protects or harbours thieves or helps conceal/dispose of stolen property.
(d) Habitually commits, attempts, or abets kidnapping, abduction, extortion, cheating, mischief, or offences related to counterfeit coins/stamps (Chapter X BNS) or certain offences against public justice (Sec 178-181 BNS).
(e) Habitually commits, attempts, or abets offences involving a breach of the peace.
(f) Habitually commits, attempts, or abets offences under specific Acts (like Drugs and Cosmetics Act, Foreigners Act, Essential Commodities Act, etc.) or other laws dealing with hoarding, profiteering, food/drug adulteration, or corruption.
(g) Is so desperate and dangerous that allowing them to be free without security is hazardous to the community.
Action: The Magistrate can issue an order requiring such a person to show cause why they should not be ordered to execute a bail bond (promise with surety) for their good behaviour.
Duration: The bond duration decided by the Magistrate cannot exceed three years.
Example: The police provide an Executive Magistrate with records showing Mr. T has multiple past convictions for theft and receiving stolen property, and recent intelligence suggests he is actively involved again. The Magistrate, believing Mr. T is a habitual offender under clause (a) or (b), issues a show cause notice asking him why he shouldn’t provide a bail bond (with sureties) guaranteeing his good behaviour for the next three years.
Section 130: Order to be made
Explanation: When a Magistrate decides it’s necessary to require someone to show cause under sections 126, 127, 128, or 129, they must make a written order.
Content of the Order: The order must clearly state:
The substance of the information received that forms the basis for the action.
The amount of the bond required.
The duration (term) for which the bond will be in force.
The number, sufficiency, and fitness of sureties required (if any).
Example: Following the information about Mr. T (Sec 129), the Magistrate drafts a formal written order stating: “Information has been received suggesting you are a habitual receiver of stolen property… You are required to show cause why you should not execute a bail bond for ₹50,000 with two sureties (each for ₹50,000) for your good behaviour for a period of three years…”.
Section 131: Procedure in respect of person present in Court
Explanation: If the person against whom the show cause order (made under Section 130) is directed is already present in the Magistrate’s court when the order is made, the order must be read out loud to them. If the person requests it, the Magistrate must explain the substance (main points) of the order to them.
Example: Mr. P was brought to the Executive Magistrate’s court for another matter. While there, the Magistrate receives information warranting action under Section 126 and makes a written order (under Sec 130) asking Mr. P to show cause. Since Mr. P is present, the Magistrate reads the order aloud to him right then and there. If Mr. P doesn’t fully understand, he can ask the Magistrate to explain what it means.
Section 132: Summons or warrant in case of person not so present
Explanation: If the person against whom the show cause order (Sec 130) is made is not present in court, the Magistrate must issue a summons requiring them to appear.
Warrant for Person in Custody: If the person is already in custody (e.g., in jail for another reason), the Magistrate issues a warrant directing the officer holding the person to bring them before the court.
Proviso (Warrant for Immediate Arrest): The Magistrate has the power to issue an arrest warrant instead of a summons at any time if:
There’s a report from a police officer or other information (the substance of which the Magistrate must record).
This report/information gives reason to fear that a breach of the peace will be committed.
The Magistrate believes this breach cannot be prevented except by immediately arresting the person.
Example 1 (Summons): The Magistrate makes an order against Ms. Q (under Sec 127) who is not in court. The Magistrate issues a summons ordering Ms. Q to appear on a specific date.
Example 2 (Warrant – Custody): Mr. T (against whom an order under Sec 129 is made) is already serving a short sentence in jail. The Magistrate issues a warrant to the jail superintendent to produce Mr. T in court.
Example 3 (Proviso – Arrest Warrant): After issuing a show cause order against Mr. P (under Sec 126), the Magistrate receives urgent police intelligence that Mr. P is mobilizing a group right now to start a riot later today. Believing only immediate arrest can prevent the violence, the Magistrate records this information and issues an arrest warrant for Mr. P, instead of relying on the slower summons process.
Section 133: Copy of order to accompany summons or warrant
Explanation: Every summons or warrant issued under Section 132 must be accompanied by a copy of the original show cause order made under Section 130. The officer serving the summons or executing the warrant must deliver this copy to the person being summoned or arrested. This ensures the person knows the exact reasons and details (substance of information, bond amount, duration, sureties) behind the summons/arrest.
Example: When the police officer serves the summons on Ms. Q (Sec 132, Example 1), they also hand her a copy of the Magistrate’s written order (Sec 130) detailing the allegations about disseminating harmful material and the proposed bond conditions.
Section 134: Power to dispense with personal attendance
Explanation: The Magistrate has the discretion to dispense with (waive) the personal attendance of the person called upon to show cause (under Sec 130), if the Magistrate sees sufficient reason to do so. In such cases, the person can be permitted to appear through their advocate instead.
Example: Ms. Q (Sec 133 example) is severely ill and hospitalized. Her lawyer presents medical proof to the Magistrate. The Magistrate, seeing sufficient cause, allows Ms. Q’s lawyer to represent her in the proceedings under Chapter IX without requiring Ms. Q to be physically present.
Section 135: Inquiry as to truth of information
Sub-section (1): Commencement of Inquiry
Explanation: The Magistrate starts the inquiry into the truth of the information (on which the Sec 130 order was based) when:
The order (Sec 130) has been read/explained to a person present in court (Sec 131), OR
The person appears or is brought before the Magistrate in response to a summons or warrant (Sec 132).
Procedure: The Magistrate proceeds to inquire into the truth of the original information and takes any further evidence that seems necessary.
Example: Mr. P appears before the Magistrate in response to the summons (Sec 126 example). The Magistrate now begins the formal inquiry, asking questions and potentially calling witnesses (like the police officer who gave the initial report) to determine if Mr. P is indeed likely to breach the peace.
Sub-section (2): Manner of Inquiry
Explanation: The inquiry should be conducted, as closely as possible, following the procedure prescribed in the BNSS for conducting trials and recording evidence in summons-cases. (Summons-case procedures are generally simpler than warrant-case procedures).
Example: During the inquiry against Mr. P, the Magistrate will record the substance of witness testimonies, similar to how it’s done in minor offence trials (summons-cases).
Sub-section (3): Interim Bond
Explanation:After the inquiry has started but before it is completed, if the Magistrate believes immediate measures are necessary to prevent a breach of peace, disturbance, commission of an offence, or for public safety, they can take interim action.
Action: For reasons recorded in writing, the Magistrate can direct the person (against whom the Sec 130 order was made) to execute a bond (with or without sureties) for keeping the peace or maintaining good behaviour until the inquiry concludes.
Detention on Default: If the person fails to execute this interim bond, the Magistrate can detain them in custody until the bond is executed or until the inquiry is finished.
Proviso (a): A bond for good behaviour cannot be demanded at this interim stage from someone against whom proceedings are only for keeping the peace (i.e., proceedings initiated only under Sec 126). Interim good behaviour bonds are only possible if the original proceedings were under Sec 127 (dissemination), Sec 128 (suspicious concealment), or Sec 129 (habitual offenders).
Proviso (b): The conditions of this interim bond (amount, number/type of sureties) cannot be more demanding (onerous) than those specified in the original show cause order (Sec 130).
Example: During the inquiry against Mr. P (Sec 126 case), tensions remain high. The Magistrate fears Mr. P might still cause trouble before the inquiry finishes. The Magistrate records these reasons and orders Mr. P to immediately execute an interim bond of ₹10,000 (the amount from the Sec 130 order) to keep the peace until the inquiry concludes. If Mr. P refuses, he can be detained. Since the case is under Sec 126, the Magistrate cannot demand an interim good behaviour bond [Proviso (a)].
Sub-section (4): Proof of Habitual Offender Status
Explanation: For the purposes of this section (specifically relevant to inquiries under Sec 129), the fact that a person is a habitual offender or is desperate and dangerous can be proved by evidence of their general reputation (what the community generally thinks of them) or by other evidence.
Example: In the inquiry against Mr. T (Sec 129 case), the prosecution can call respectable community members to testify about Mr. T’s general reputation as a known thief, in addition to presenting evidence of his past convictions.
Sub-section (5): Joint or Separate Inquiries
Explanation: If two or more people were associated together in the matter under inquiry (e.g., suspected of planning a breach of peace together), the Magistrate can decide whether to deal with them in the same inquiry or in separate inquiries, based on what seems fair (just).
Example: If Mr. P and Mr. X were allegedly planning violence together, the Magistrate might hold one joint inquiry for both, or conduct separate inquiries if their roles or the evidence against them differs significantly.
Sub-section (6): Time Limit for Inquiry
Explanation: The inquiry under this section must be completed within six months from its commencement date. If not completed within six months, the proceedings automatically terminate (end), UNLESS the Magistrate, for special reasons recorded in writing, directs otherwise (allows continuation).
Proviso (Detention): If the person has been kept in detention pending the inquiry, the proceedings against that person terminate automatically after six months of detention, unless they were already terminated earlier. This detention-linked termination cannot be extended by the Magistrate.
Example: The inquiry against Mr. P starts on Jan 1st. It must normally finish by June 30th. If it’s not finished, the case ends. However, if there was a complex witness issue, the Magistrate might record this “special reason” and allow the inquiry to continue. But, if Mr. P was detained on Feb 1st for failing to furnish the interim bond (sub-section 3) and remains in detention, the proceedings must end by Aug 1st (6 months of detention), regardless of any special reasons.
Sub-section (7): Review by Sessions Judge
Explanation: If a Magistrate directs the continuation of proceedings beyond six months (under sub-section 6), the person aggrieved (the person against whom proceedings continue) can apply to the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge can vacate (cancel) the Magistrate’s direction if satisfied that it wasn’t based on any special reason or was perverse (unreasonable or illogical).
Example: The Magistrate extends the inquiry against Mr. P beyond six months, citing “workload” as the reason. Mr. P applies to the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge might find “workload” is not a “special reason” justifying the delay in this specific case and cancel the Magistrate’s extension order, thereby terminating the proceedings.
Section 136: Order to give security
Explanation: If, after conducting the inquiry (under Sec 135), it is proved that it is necessary for the person to execute a bond (with or without sureties) for keeping the peace or maintaining good behaviour (as applicable to the original notice), the Magistrate shall make an order requiring them to do so.
Proviso (a): Consistency with Original Order
Explanation: The final security order cannot demand a different type of security (peace vs. good behaviour), a larger amount, or a longer duration than what was specified in the initial show cause order (Sec 130).
Example: The initial order (Sec 130) asked Mr. P to show cause for a peace bond of ₹10,000 for 6 months. After inquiry, the Magistrate finds it necessary. The final order (Sec 136) must require a peace bond, cannot exceed ₹10,000, and cannot be for more than 6 months.
Proviso (b): Amount Not Excessive
Explanation: The amount of every bond must be fixed considering the circumstances of the case and must not be excessive (unreasonably high).
Example: Setting a ₹1 crore bond for a person with very limited means for a minor potential disturbance would likely be considered excessive.
Proviso (c): Bond for a Child
Explanation: If the person required to give security is a child (minor), the bond cannot be executed by the child themselves; it must be executed only by their surety or sureties.
Example: If a 16-year-old is found likely to breach the peace, the Magistrate cannot ask the teenager to sign the bond. Instead, the Magistrate orders the teenager’s parent(s) or another suitable adult to execute the bond as surety.
Section 137: Discharge of person informed against
Explanation: If, after the inquiry under Section 135, it is not proved that it’s necessary for the person to execute a bond (for peace or good behaviour), the Magistrate must:
Make an entry in the record stating this finding.
If the person is in custody only for the purpose of this inquiry (e.g., detained under Sec 135(3)), release them.
If the person is not in custody, discharge them (formally end the proceedings against them).
Example: After the inquiry, the Magistrate finds insufficient evidence that Mr. P is likely to breach the peace. The Magistrate records this finding, formally discharges Mr. P, and if Mr. P was in custody for not giving an interim bond, orders his release.
Section 138: Commencement of period for which security is required
Sub-section (1): Person Already Imprisoned
Explanation: If a person ordered to give security (under Sec 125 after conviction, or Sec 136 after inquiry) is already serving a sentence of imprisonment for another offence at the time the security order is made, the period for which the security is required will only start after that existing sentence expires.
Example: Mr. T is ordered (under Sec 136) to give security for good behaviour for 3 years. He is currently serving a 6-month sentence for a different crime. The 3-year security period will begin only after he completes his 6-month sentence.
Sub-section (2): Other Cases
Explanation: In all other cases (where the person is not currently imprisoned), the security period starts on the date the order (Sec 125 or 136) is made, UNLESS the Magistrate, for sufficient reason, fixes a later start date.
Example: Ms. Q is ordered (under Sec 136) to give security for good behaviour for 1 year. The order is made on Nov 1st. The 1-year period starts immediately on Nov 1st, unless the Magistrate specifies, for a valid reason, that it should start later (e.g., from Dec 1st).
Section 139: Contents of bond
Explanation: Specifies what the bond executed by the person legally binds them to do:
Peace Bond: Binds the person to keep the peace.
Good Behaviour Bond: Binds the person to be of good behaviour.
Breach of Good Behaviour Bond: Crucially, it clarifies that committing, attempting to commit, or abetting any offence punishable with imprisonment, anywhere it might be committed, constitutes a breach of a good behaviour bond.
Example: Mr. T executes a good behaviour bond for 3 years (Sec 129 case). If, during those 3 years, he commits theft (punishable with imprisonment), even in another city, he has breached the conditions of his good behaviour bond, which can lead to penalties (like forfeiture of the bond amount) in addition to punishment for the theft itself. Committing an act that only breaches the peace (but isn’t an offence punishable with imprisonment) would breach a peace bond, but might not automatically breach a good behaviour bond unless it also falls under the definition of misbehaviour in this context.
Section 140: Power to reject sureties
Sub-section (1): Rejection of Unfit Surety
Explanation: A Magistrate can refuse to accept a surety offered, or reject a surety previously accepted (by themselves or a predecessor), under Chapter IX, if they believe the surety is an “unfit person” for the purposes of the bail bond (the bond requiring sureties).
Proviso (Inquiry Required): Before refusing or rejecting a surety, the Magistrate must conduct an inquiry into the fitness of the surety. This inquiry can be held by the Magistrate themselves (under oath) or delegated to a subordinate Magistrate who will hold the inquiry and submit a report.
Example: Mr. T (Sec 129 case) offers Mr. Y as his surety. The Magistrate receives information that Mr. Y himself has several pending criminal cases and no stable income. The Magistrate decides to hold an inquiry into Mr. Y’s fitness.
Sub-section (2): Notice and Record of Inquiry
Explanation: Before holding the inquiry into the surety’s fitness, the Magistrate must give reasonable notice to both the surety and the person who offered them (the person required to give security). The substance of the evidence gathered during the inquiry must be recorded.
Example: The Magistrate notifies both Mr. T and Mr. Y about the date and time of the inquiry into Mr. Y’s fitness. During the inquiry, the Magistrate questions Mr. Y under oath about his background and financial stability and records the key points of his testimony.
Sub-section (3): Order of Rejection
Explanation: After considering the evidence from the inquiry (whether held directly or via report from a subordinate Magistrate), if the Magistrate is satisfied that the surety is unfit, they must make an order refusing to accept (if offered) or rejecting (if previously accepted) the surety. The order must record the reasons for this decision.
Proviso (Appearance of Principal): Before rejecting a surety who was previously accepted, the Magistrate must issue a summons or warrant to make the person for whom the surety is bound (the principal, e.g., Mr. T) appear or be brought before the court. This is necessary because rejecting an existing surety might require the principal to find a replacement or face consequences.
Example: Based on the inquiry, the Magistrate concludes Mr. Y is unfit due to his criminal record and lack of assets. The Magistrate issues a written order refusing to accept Mr. Y as a surety for Mr. T, stating the reasons. If Mr. Y had already been accepted earlier, the Magistrate would first ensure Mr. T is brought to court before issuing the rejection order against Mr. Y.
Section 141: Imprisonment in default of security
Sub-section (1): Committal to Prison
(a) Failure to Give Initial Security:
Explanation: If a person ordered to give security (under Sec 125 after conviction, or Sec 136 after inquiry) fails to provide the required security (bond/bail bond with sureties) on or before the date the security period starts, they shall be committed to prison (or detained if already in prison).
Duration: They remain imprisoned until the security period expires, or until they furnish the required security to the court/Magistrate who ordered it, whichever comes first.
Example: Mr. P is ordered (Sec 136) to furnish a peace bond of ₹10,000 for 6 months, starting July 1st. If he fails to provide the bond by July 1st, the Magistrate will issue a warrant committing him to prison for up to 6 months. If he provides the bond on August 15th, he will be released then. If not, he stays until December 31st (end of 6 months).
(b) Breach of Peace Bond:
Explanation: If a person has already executed a peace bond (under Sec 136) and it is later proven (to the satisfaction of the Magistrate or their successor) that they breached the bond’s condition (i.e., didn’t keep the peace), the Magistrate can, after recording the grounds for proof, order the person to be arrested and detained in prison.
Duration: Detention lasts until the original bond period expires.
Independent Action: This imprisonment is separate from and in addition to any other punishment or forfeiture (like paying the bond amount) the person might face due to the breach or the act constituting the breach.
Example: Mr. P executed a 6-month peace bond. Three months later, he gets into a public fight (breaching the peace). The Magistrate, after confirming the breach, orders Mr. P arrested and detained for the remaining 3 months of the original bond period. Mr. P might also face separate charges for the fight itself and might have to forfeit the bond amount.
Sub-section (2): Referral to Sessions Judge (Longer Periods)
Explanation: If a Magistrate orders security for a period exceeding one year (which can only happen under Sec 129 for habitual offenders, as other sections cap it at one year), and the person fails to give the security, the Magistrate issues a warrant to detain the person pending orders from the Sessions Judge. The case proceedings must then be promptly sent to the Sessions Judge.
Example: Mr. T (habitual offender, Sec 129) is ordered by an Executive Magistrate to provide a good behaviour bond for three years. He fails to do so. The Magistrate detains him and immediately forwards the case file to the Sessions Judge for review.
Sub-section (3): Sessions Judge’s Order
Explanation: The Sessions Judge examines the proceedings received from the Magistrate, can ask for more information or evidence, and must give the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard. After this, the Sessions Judge passes the final order they deem fit.
Proviso (Maximum Imprisonment): The total period of imprisonment for failure to give security ordered by the Sessions Judge cannot exceed three years.
Example: The Sessions Judge reviews Mr. T’s case, hears Mr. T (or his lawyer), and might confirm the need for security. If Mr. T still fails, the Sessions Judge might order his detention for the period required (up to the maximum of three years).
Sub-section (4): Joint Proceedings Referral
Explanation: If security was required from multiple people in the same proceeding, and one of them is referred to the Sessions Judge under sub-section (2) (because their period exceeded one year), the referral must also include the cases of any others in that proceeding who were ordered to give security (even if for less than a year) and failed to do so. Sub-sections (2) and (3) then apply to these other persons as well, but their maximum imprisonment cannot exceed the period for which they were originally ordered to give security.
Example: Mr. T (3 years security) and Mr. U (1 year security) were part of the same Sec 129 proceeding and both failed to furnish bonds. When the Magistrate refers Mr. T’s case to the Sessions Judge, Mr. U’s case must also be included. The Sessions Judge reviews both. If imprisonment is ordered, Mr. T faces up to 3 years, while Mr. U faces only up to 1 year.
Sub-section (5): Transfer to Additional Sessions Judge
Explanation: The Sessions Judge can transfer proceedings referred under sub-section (2) or (4) to an Additional Sessions Judge, who can then exercise the same powers as the Sessions Judge under this section.
Example: Due to workload, the Sessions Judge transfers Mr. T’s and Mr. U’s cases to an Additional Sessions Judge for the final order.
Sub-section (6): Security Tendered in Jail
Explanation: If a person imprisoned for failing to give security manages to arrange the security while in jail and tenders it to the officer in charge of the jail, that officer must immediately refer the matter back to the Court or Magistrate who made the original order and wait for their instructions (presumably for verification and release).
Example: Mr. P (imprisoned under sub-sec 1(a)) arranges the required bond and surety two months into his detention. He presents the documents to the jail superintendent, who forwards them to the ordering Magistrate and awaits the Magistrate’s confirmation and release order.
Sub-section (7): Nature of Imprisonment (Peace Bond)
Explanation: Imprisonment for failing to give security for keeping the peace (under Sec 125 or 136) must be simple imprisonment (without hard labour).
Sub-section (8): Nature of Imprisonment (Good Behaviour Bond)
Explanation: Imprisonment for failing to give security for good behaviour varies:
If proceedings were under Sec 127 (disseminating matter): Simple imprisonment.
If proceedings were under Sec 128 (suspicious concealment) or Sec 129 (habitual offenders): Rigorous (with hard labour) or simple imprisonment, as the Court or Magistrate directs in each case.
Example: Mr. T (Sec 129 case), if imprisoned for default, could face rigorous imprisonment if the court deems it appropriate, while Ms. Q (Sec 127 case) would only face simple imprisonment.
Section 142: Power to release persons imprisoned for failing to give security
Sub-section (1): Discharge by DM or CJM
Explanation: The District Magistrate (DM) (if the original order under Sec 136 was by an Executive Magistrate) or the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) (in any other case, e.g., order under Sec 125 or by a Judicial Magistrate) can order the discharge of a person imprisoned for failing to give security under Chapter IX, if they believe the person can be released without danger to the community or anyone else.
Example: Mr. P was imprisoned by an Executive Magistrate’s order (Sec 136) for failing to give a peace bond. After 4 months, based on reports of his conduct in jail and changed circumstances outside, the DM believes he’s no longer a threat and orders his discharge.
Sub-section (2): Power to Reduce Security Requirements
Explanation: The High Court or Court of Session always has the power to modify the original security order. Additionally, the DM (for EM orders under Sec 136) or the CJM (in other cases) can order a reduction in the security amount, the number of sureties required, or the duration for which security was initially required for someone imprisoned for default.
Example: Mr. T (imprisoned for failing 3-year bond) applies to the CJM. The CJM reviews the case and decides the original amount was too high. The CJM issues an order reducing the bond amount, potentially allowing Mr. T to furnish it and get released.
Sub-section (3): Conditional Discharge
Explanation: An order under sub-section (1) can direct the discharge either unconditionally or subject to conditions accepted by the person being discharged.
Proviso: Any condition imposed automatically ceases to be effective once the original period for which security was ordered expires.
Example: The DM orders Mr. P’s early discharge (sub-sec 1) on the condition that he reports weekly to the local police station. This condition remains in force only until the end of the original 6-month security period.
Sub-section (4): Rules for Conditional Discharge
Explanation: The State Government can make rules prescribing the conditions upon which conditional discharge may be granted.
Example: State rules might specify standard conditions like staying within a certain area, not contacting specific individuals, etc., that Magistrates/DMs can impose.
Sub-section (5): Cancellation for Breach of Condition
Explanation: If the DM (for EM orders under Sec 136) or CJM (in other cases), or their successor, believes that a condition of discharge (imposed under sub-sec 3) has not been fulfilled, they can cancel the conditional discharge order.
Example: Mr. P, conditionally discharged, fails to report to the police station for two consecutive weeks. The DM cancels his discharge order.
Sub-section (6): Arrest after Cancellation
Explanation: When a conditional discharge is cancelled (under sub-sec 5), any police officer can arrest the person without a warrant. The arrested person must then be produced before the DM (for EM orders) or CJM (in other cases).
Example: Following the cancellation, police arrest Mr. P and bring him before the DM.
Sub-section (7): Remand for Unexpired Portion
Explanation: When the person is produced (under sub-sec 6), unless they furnish security according to the original order (Sec 125 or 136) for the unexpired portion of the term, the DM or CJM can remand them back to prison to serve out that unexpired portion.
Calculating Unexpired Portion: This portion is deemed to be the period between the date the condition was breached and the date the person would have originally been entitled to release (had they not been conditionally discharged).
Example: Mr. P’s original 6-month term ended Dec 31st. He was conditionally discharged May 1st. He breached the condition on June 1st. He is arrested and produced on June 10th. If he doesn’t give security now, he can be remanded to prison for the “unexpired portion”. This period runs from the breach (June 1st) to the original end date (Dec 31st), effectively meaning he has to serve the remaining approx. 7 months.
Sub-section (8): Release on Giving Security (After Remand)
Explanation: A person remanded under sub-section (7) can still be released at any time (subject to Sec 141 provisions) if they give security according to the original order’s terms for the unexpired portion, to the court/Magistrate who made the original order or their successor.
Example: Mr. P, remanded back to prison under sub-sec 7, manages to furnish the original security amount in July. He can then be released by the DM/CJM’s order.
Sub-section (9): Cancellation of Bond by Higher Courts/DM/CJM
Explanation: The High Court or Court of Session can, at any time for sufficient reasons (recorded in writing), cancel any peace or good behaviour bond executed under Chapter IX by its own order. Similarly, the DM (for EM orders under Sec 136) or CJM (in other cases) can cancel a bond executed under their order or the order of any court in their district.
Example: Circumstances change significantly, and it becomes clear that Mr. P is no longer a threat. The DM, even though the bond period isn’t over, can record reasons and cancel the peace bond Mr. P executed.
Sub-section (10): Surety’s Application to Cancel Bond
Explanation: Any surety who has guaranteed someone’s peaceable conduct or good behaviour can apply at any time to the court that ordered the bond, asking to cancel the bond (releasing the surety from their obligation). Upon such application, the court must issue a summons or warrant to make the person for whom the surety is bound appear or be brought before it.
Example: Mr. Z stood surety for Mr. T’s good behaviour bond. Mr. Z learns Mr. T is reverting to criminal activities and no longer wishes to be responsible. Mr. Z applies to the Magistrate. The Magistrate issues a warrant for Mr. T to be brought to court.
Section 143: Security for unexpired period of bond
Sub-section (1): Fresh Security Requirement
Explanation: When a person appears or is brought before the Magistrate/Court because:
Their surety was rejected after being initially accepted (proviso to Sec 140(3)), OR
Their surety applied to be discharged (Sec 142(10)), the Magistrate/Court must cancel the bond executed by that person and order them to provide fresh security of the same description (amount, number of sureties, type of bond) as the original security, but only for the unexpired portion of the original term.
Example: Mr. T is brought before the Magistrate because his surety Mr. Z applied for discharge (Sec 142(10)). The original bond was for 3 years, and 1 year has passed. The Magistrate cancels the existing bond and orders Mr. T to find new, acceptable sureties and execute a fresh bond for the remaining 2 years, matching the original conditions.
Sub-section (2): Application of Consequential Sections
Explanation: Any order requiring fresh security under sub-section (1) is treated as if it were an original order made under Sec 125 or Sec 136. This means all the subsequent provisions regarding the bond’s contents, rejection of sureties, imprisonment in default, release, etc. (Sections 139 to 142 inclusive) apply to this fresh security requirement.
Example: If Mr. T fails to furnish the fresh security ordered under Sec 143(1), the provisions of Sec 141 (Imprisonment in default) will apply, just as if he had failed to furnish the original security.
