Section 10 BNSS: Chief Judicial Magistrate and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, etc (Formerly Section 12 CrPC)

Section 10 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Chief Judicial Magistrate and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, etc

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) In every district, the High Court shall appoint a Judicial Magistrate of the first class to be the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

(2) The High Court may appoint any Judicial Magistrate of the first class to be an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, and such Magistrate shall have all or any of the powers of a Chief Judicial Magistrate under this Sanhita or under any other law for the time being in force as the High Court may direct.

(3) The High Court may designate any Judicial Magistrate of the first class in any sub-division as the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate and relieve him of the responsibilities specified in this section as occasion requires.

(4) Subject to the general control of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, every Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate shall also have and exercise, such powers of supervision and control over the work of the Judicial Magistrates (other than Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates) in the sub-division as the High Court may, by general or special order, specify in this behalf.

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 10

Section 10 mandates the appointment of a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates (ACJM) in every district by the High Court, defining their administrative and supervisory powers.

Appointment of CJM: High Court appoints a Judicial Magistrate of the first class to be the Chief Judicial Magistrate in every district.
ACJM Powers: High Court may appoint Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates who exercise all or any powers of a CJM.
Administrative Primacy: CJM exercises general administrative control, roster distribution, and transfer powers over all Judicial Magistrates in the district.

Key Landmark Precedents:

A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988) 2 SCC 602: Emphasised that judicial allocation of cases by Chief Judicial Magistrates and District Judges must follow objective roster principles without executive interference.
Radhey Shyam v. Chhabi Nath (2015) 5 SCC 423: Affirmed that CJMs exercise judicial superintendence over subordinate magistrates under statutory procedural law.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Whenever there is apprehension of bias before a particular magistrate, apply directly to the CJM under Section 451 BNSS (old Section 410 CrPC) for withdrawal and transfer of the case to another court.