Section 144 CrPC (Now BNSS Section 163): Powers, Scope & UPSC Guide
Complete UPSC guide to Section 144 CrPC — powers of District Magistrate, restrictions on assembly, duration, Supreme Court rulings, and the transition to BNSS Section 163.
Section 144 of the CrPC is now Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023. When the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure on 1 July 2024, the old Section 144 prohibitory-order power was re-enacted as Section 163 BNSS — same DM/SDM authority, same grounds of public order, safety and peace, same two-month limit and ex-parte power, with an added explicit reference to electronic communication.
Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 — now replaced by Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — empowers a District Magistrate (or Sub-Divisional Magistrate) to issue orders prohibiting the assembly of people, restricting movement, or directing any person to abstain from certain acts, when there is an apprehension of danger to public order, safety, or peace.
It is the most commonly used emergency provision in Indian administration and frequently appears in news during protests, communal tensions, and elections.
What Section 144 Does
The provision empowers a District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, or Executive Magistrate empowered by the State Government to issue an order directing any person or the public generally to:
- Abstain from a certain act
- Take certain order with respect to property in their possession or management
- When there is sufficient ground to proceed and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable
Typical Restrictions Under Section 144
| Restriction | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Prohibition of assembly of 4 or more persons | Prevent mob violence or rioting |
| Restriction on carrying weapons | Prevent armed confrontation |
| Prohibition on processions | Prevent communal or political violence |
| Internet/mobile suspension (ordered separately but often accompanies S.144) | Prevent spread of rumours |
| Curfew (complete restriction on movement) | Extreme measure during severe disorder |
Key Features
Duration: An order under Section 144 cannot remain in force for more than 2 months from the date of the order. However, the State Government can extend it up to 6 months if it considers that doing so is necessary for preventing danger to human life, health, or safety.
Ex parte power: The order can be issued without notice to the person against whom it is directed — this is the "emergency" character of the provision. The magistrate acts on their own assessment of the situation.
Who can issue: District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, or any Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government.
Penalty for violation: Violating a Section 144 order is punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 223 BNS) — imprisonment up to 6 months, or fine, or both.
Section 144 CrPC vs. Section 163 BNSS
With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (effective July 1, 2024), Section 144 CrPC has been replaced by Section 163 BNSS. The core provisions remain similar:
| Aspect | Section 144 CrPC | Section 163 BNSS |
|---|---|---|
| Power to issue | DM, SDM, Executive Magistrate | Same |
| Grounds | Danger to public order, safety, peace | Same |
| Duration | Up to 2 months (extendable to 6 months) | Same |
| Ex parte power | Yes | Yes |
| Key change | — | Section 163 BNSS also explicitly mentions electronic communication and internet in its scope |
For UPSC Prelims, know both the old (Section 144 CrPC) and new (Section 163 BNSS) numbers.
Constitutional Validity
Section 144 has been challenged multiple times on the ground that it violates:
- Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression
- Article 19(1)(b): Freedom of peaceful assembly
- Article 19(1)(d): Freedom of movement
- Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty
Key Supreme Court Rulings
Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): This landmark case arose from the internet shutdown in Jammu & Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 (August 2019). The Supreme Court held:
- Section 144 orders and internet shutdowns must be proportionate — the least restrictive measure must be used
- Orders must be published so they can be challenged
- Orders must have a time limit — indefinite orders are unconstitutional
- The government must review such orders periodically
- Freedom of speech and expression through the internet is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a)
Madhu Limaye v. SDM Monghyr (1971): The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Section 144 but held that it must be used only in emergent situations and cannot be used to suppress legitimate dissent.
Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar (1965): Distinguished "law and order" from "public order" — Section 144 can only be used for threats to "public order," not ordinary law-and-order problems.
When Section 144 Is Typically Imposed
| Situation | Example |
|---|---|
| Communal tensions | Before/during religious festivals or after communal incidents |
| Protests and agitations | Farmers' protests, CAA protests, student agitations |
| Elections | Around polling stations to prevent intimidation |
| Natural disasters | Restricting access to affected areas |
| VIP visits | Security for high-profile visits |
| Epidemic/pandemic | COVID-19 lockdown enforcement (2020) |
Misuse and Concerns
Blanket orders: Section 144 orders are often imposed across entire districts or states as a precautionary measure — far beyond what is required.
Indefinite imposition: Despite the 2-month statutory limit, authorities frequently issue fresh orders sequentially, creating de facto permanent restrictions.
Suppression of dissent: Critics argue the provision is routinely used to prevent legitimate protests and political assemblies — particularly by opposition parties and civil society groups.
Internet shutdowns: India leads the world in internet shutdowns. According to Access Now, India imposed more internet shutdowns than any other country in 2023, 2024, and 2025. Section 144 (or the Telecom Suspension Rules) is the most common legal basis.
Section 144 vs. Curfew
| Aspect | Section 144 Order | Curfew |
|---|---|---|
| Legal basis | Section 144 CrPC / 163 BNSS | Also under Section 144, but more extreme |
| Restrictions | Specific prohibitions (assembly, weapons, processions) | Complete restriction on movement; everyone must stay indoors |
| Severity | Moderate | Maximum |
| Duration | Hours to days (extendable) | Usually hours to days |
| Enforcement | Police patrolling, checkpoints | Armed forces may be deployed |
UPSC Relevance
GS2 (Polity): Fundamental rights restrictions, Article 19, District Magistrate powers.
GS3 (Internal Security): Public order management, internet shutdowns.
Key Prelims facts:
- Section 144 CrPC → now Section 163 BNSS
- Power: District Magistrate / SDM / Executive Magistrate
- Duration: Up to 2 months (extendable to 6 months by State Government)
- Violation: Punishable under Section 188 IPC / 223 BNS
- Anuradha Bhasin (2020): Internet is a fundamental right; Section 144 orders must be proportionate
- Distinction: "Public order" vs. "law and order" (Ram Manohar Lohia case)
- India: Most internet shutdowns globally