Supreme Court Clarifies Mandatory Procedure Under BNSS
The Supreme Court of India has advised Magistrates to strictly comply with Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) when dealing with complaints alleging offences committed by public servants in the course of their official duties.
The Court held that a Magistrate cannot proceed mechanically and must first determine whether the alleged act has a direct nexus with the discharge of official functions.
What Section 175(4) BNSS Requires
Section 175(4) BNSS mandates that where an offence appears to have been committed by a public servant while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty, the Magistrate must call for a report from the concerned superior officer before taking further steps in the criminal process.
The Supreme Court clarified that this requirement is not discretionary, but a statutory safeguard embedded to prevent misuse of criminal law.
Objective of the Provision
The Court explained that the provision serves to:
- Shield public servants from frivolous and retaliatory complaints
- Prevent criminalisation of bona fide administrative decisions
- Ensure judicial scrutiny at the threshold stage
- Maintain a balance between accountability and administrative efficiency
According to the Court, exposing public officials to routine prosecution for official acts would paralyse governance and deter lawful decision-making.
Guidance Issued to Magistrates
The Supreme Court advised Magistrates to:
- Examine whether the alleged offence is reasonably connected to official duty
- Obtain and assess the superior officer’s report before proceeding
- Avoid automatic registration of cases or issuance of summons
- Record reasons reflecting application of judicial mind
Non-compliance with Section 175(4) BNSS, the Court noted, may render proceedings procedurally defective.
Legal Significance of the Ruling
This clarification strengthens the procedural architecture of the BNSS, reinforcing long-standing principles governing prosecution of public servants. The ruling reiterates that criminal law must not become an instrument of harassment, and procedural safeguards must be honoured to uphold fairness in the justice system.
