CRPCSection 144Verified

Power to Issue Order in Urgent Cases of Nuisance or Apprehended Danger

Executive Magistrate's power to issue immediate prohibitory orders in urgent cases

Legal Commentary

Section 144(1): In cases where, in the opinion of a District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government, 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 134, 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. Section 144(2): An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving of individual notice, be passed ex parte. Section 144(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 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 direction, expired.

Explanation

Section 144 is the most commonly invoked — and most frequently abused — provision in the entire CrPC. Its two-word colloquial name ('Section 144') has become part of Indian political and cultural vocabulary: when authorities impose restrictions on gatherings or movement during tense situations, they 'impose Section 144'. The provision grants Executive Magistrates extraordinarily broad powers to prohibit any activity likely to cause public disorder — including assemblies, processions, carrying weapons, and crucially in the digital age, internet services. The internet shutdown application of Section 144 became the most litigated aspect of the provision in recent years, culminating in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) which held internet shutdowns under Section 144 must be temporary, proportionate, reviewed periodically, and subject to judicial review. Key features: ex parte orders possible in emergencies (without hearing the affected party); the order must specify material facts; the maximum validity is 2 months initially, extendable to 6 months by State Government (not 12 months as sometimes claimed); the order can be challenged by any aggrieved person under Section 144(5); and violation of a Section 144 order is an offence under BNS Section 223 (previously IPC Section 188).

Related Topics

CrPC Section 144Section 144 IndiaSection 144 CrPC explainedprohibitory order IndiaCrPC 144 internet shutdownSection 144 order India144 CrPC how long validSection 144 assembly restriction IndiaBNSS Section 163curfew India CrPCSection 144 duration IndiaSection 144 violation penaltyinternet ban India CrPC 144

Quick Actions

COMPARE WITH BNS

Historical Context

Original Act
Code of Criminal Procedure
Category
CrPC
← All Code of Criminal Procedure Sections