Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter X: Maintenance of Public Order and Tranquillity · C.–Urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger
Section 144: Power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
In urgent cases, a District Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate or specially empowered Executive Magistrate can, by a written order stating the material facts, direct any person to refrain from an act or manage their property in a certain way, if this is likely to prevent obstruction, annoyance or injury, danger to human life, health or safety, a disturbance of public tranquillity, a riot or an affray.
- In emergencies the order can be made without prior notice.
- It can be directed at an individual, people in a particular area, or the public generally when visiting a place.
- It lasts at most two months, but the State Government can extend it by up to six months more to prevent danger to life or a riot.
- The Magistrate or State Government can cancel or change the order on its own or on an aggrieved person's application, after giving them a chance to be heard, and must record reasons for rejecting it.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
(1) In cases where, in the opinion of a District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, 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.
(2) An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is directed, be passed ex parte.
(3) An order under this section may be directed to a particular individual, or to persons residing in a particular place or area, or to the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place or area.
(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, by notification, 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 order, expired, as it may specify in the said notification.
(5) Any Magistrate may, either on his own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made under this section, by himself or any Magistrate subordinate to him or by his predecessor-in-office.
(6) The State Government may, either on its own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made by it under the proviso to sub-section (4).
(7) Where an application under sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) is received, the Magistrate, or the State Government, as the case may be, shall afford to the applicant an early opportunity of appearing before him or it, either in person or by pleader and showing cause against the order; and if the Magistrate or the State Government, as the case may be, rejects the application wholly or in part, he or it shall record in writing the reasons for so doing.
D.—Disputes as to immovable property
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 144
-
Durga Prasad v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Matter pertains to initiation of inquiry against the appellant (Inspector of Police at the time of riots) on account of dereliction of duty in controlling the 1984 riots. Whether, in the facts of the case, the High…
- Abdul Khalid Saifi @ Khalid Saifi v. State of NCT of Delhi
-
Bidyut Sarkar & Anr. v. Kanchilal Pal (Dead) Through Lrs. & Anr.
Issue arose as regards admissibility of the insufficiently stamped agreement to sell.
- UOI v. Dr. Chander Prakash & Anr
-
Tapas Guha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Appellants in an Original Application before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) contended that there was widespread cutting of shade trees, uprooting of tea bushes and eviction of tea estate workers in the Doloo Tea…
-
Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
The matter pertains to the constitutional validity of the Electoral Bond Scheme which introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties; as also the constitutional validity of the provisions of the…
- Shabnam Hashmi v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Vijay Kumar Agarwal v. Parveen Singh and Ors
- Santokh Singh Chawla v. State NCT of Delhi
- Priya Narang v. State of Delhi (Govt. of Nct) & Ors
- Union of India v. Sugandhi Snuff King Pvt Ltd & Ors
- Commissioner (Food Safety), Gnctd v. Sugandhi Snuff King Pvt. Ltd. and Ors
- State v. Mohd. Qasim & Ors
- Arup Bhuyan v. State of Assam & Anr.
- Manik Majumder and Others v. Dipak Kumar Saha
- Aishat Shifa v. The State of Karnataka & Ors
- Sanjay Gupta & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Chief Secretary & Ors
- Sarabjeet Singh Mokha v. The District Magistrate, Jabalpur & Ors.
- Banka Sneha Sheela v. The State of Telangana & Ors.
- Swati Ulhas Kerkar and Ors. v. Sanjay Walavalkar and Ors.
- Himachal Pradesh Bus Stand Management and Development Authority (Hpbsm & Da) v. The Central Empowered Committee Etc. & Ors.
- Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.
- Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India & Ors.
- M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. V. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors
- Kodungallur Film Society & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
- Indian Young Lawyers Assn. v. State of Kerala 561 Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors.V. the State of Kerala & Ors.
- Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors.
- Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. The Union of India & Anr.
- Shakti Vahini v. Union of India and Others
- K. S. Varghese & Ors. v. St. Peters & Pauls Syrian Orth. & Ors.
- Anita Thakur & Ors. v. Govt. of J & K & Ors.
- M.V. Jayarajan v. High Court of Kerala & Anr.
- Narinder S. Chadha & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.
- In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident Dt.4/5.06.2011 v. Home Secretary, Union of India & Ors.
- Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India & Others
- Sikandar Singh & Ors. v. State of Bihar
- M/S. Julien Educational Trust v. Sourendra Kumar Roy & Ors.
- Devendra &Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Bharat Prasad & Ors. v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
- Radhey Shyam & Another v. Chhabi Nath & Others
- Ranju@ Gautam Ghosh v. Rekha Ghosh & Ors.
- Kachrulal Bhagbirath Agrawal and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
- State of Karnataka v. Dr. Praveen Bhai Thogadia
- Commissioner of Police and Ors. v. Acharya Jagadishwarananda Avadhuta and Anr.
- Shamsuddin and Ors. v. State of M.P.
- Vajrapu Sambayya Naidu and Ors. v. State of A.P. and Ors.
- State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Karan Singh Binayak and Ors.
- Lata Wadhwa and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors.
- Abdul Wahab Ansari v. State of Bihar and Anr.
- Suresh Kumar Bhikamchand Jain v. Pandey Ajay Bhushan and Ors.
- Naga People'S Movement of Human Rights Etc. v. Union of India
- Prasanna Kumar Roy Karmakar v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
- Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India
- Ravi Raman Prasad and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Others
- Workmen of Meenakshi Mills Ltd. Etc. Etc. v. Meenakshi Mills Ltd. and Anr. Etc. Etc.
- State of Uttar Pradesh v. Lalloo & Others.
- Mathew Areeparmtil & Ors. v. State of Blhar and Ors.
- Election Commission of India v. State of Haryana
- Acharya Jagdishwaranand Avadhuta, Etc. v. Commissioner of Police, Calcutta & Anr.
- S.P. Mittal Etc. Etc. v. Union of India and Others
- Gulam Abbas & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- Bhaiya Ramanuj Pratap Deo v. Lalu Maheshanuj Pratap Deo & Ors. and Vice-Versa
- Md. Gulam Abbas & Ors. v. Md. Ibrahim & Ors.
- State of Uttar Pradesh v. Het Ram & Ors.
- Rahim Khan v. Khurshid Ahmed & Ors.
- Ramagya Prasad Gupta & Ors. v. Murli Prasad & Ors .