Section 135 BNSS: Inquiry as to truth of information (Formerly Section 116 CrPC)

Section 135 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Inquiry as to truth of information

Official Bare Act Text

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

(1) When an order under section 130 has been read or explained under section 131 to a person present in Court, or when any person appears or is brought before a Magistrate in compliance with, or in execution of, a summons or warrant, issued under section 132, the Magistrate shall proceed to inquire into the truth of the information upon which action has been taken, and to take such further evidence as may appear necessary.

(2) Such inquiry shall be made, as nearly as may be practicable, in the manner hereinafter prescribed for conducting trial and recording evidence in summons-cases.

(3) After the commencement, and before the completion, of the inquiry under sub-section (1), the Magistrate, if he considers that immediate measures are necessary for the prevention of a breach of the peace or disturbance of the public tranquillity or the commission of any offence or for the public safety, may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, direct the person in respect of whom the order under section 130 has been made to execute a bond or bail bond, for keeping the peace or maintaining good behaviour until the conclusion of the inquiry, and may detain him in custody until such bond or bail bond is executed or, in default of execution, until the inquiry is concluded:

Provided that —

(a) no person against whom proceedings are not being taken under section 127, section 128, or section 129 shall be directed to execute a bond or bail bond for maintaining good behaviour;

(b) the conditions of such bond, whether as to the amount thereof or as to the provision of sureties or the number thereof or the pecuniary extent of their liability, shall not be more onerous than those specified in the order under section 130.

(4) For the purposes of this section the fact that a person is a habitual offender or is so desperate and dangerous as to render his being at large without security hazardous to the community may be proved by evidence of general repute or otherwise.

(5) Where two or more persons have been associated together in the matter under inquiry, they may be dealt with in the same or separate inquiries as the Magistrate shall think just.

(6) The inquiry under this section shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of its commencement, and if such inquiry is not so completed, the proceedings under this Chapter shall, on the expiry of the said period, stand terminated unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs:

Provided that where any person has been kept in detention pending such inquiry, the proceeding against that person, unless terminated earlier, shall stand terminated on the expiry of a period of six months of such detention.

(7) Where any direction is made under sub-section (6) permitting the continuance of proceedings, the Sessions Judge may, on an application made to him by the aggrieved party, vacate such direction if he is satisfied that it was not based on any special reason or was perverse.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Inquiry Sec 2(1)(g) Investigation Sec 2(1)(h) Victim Sec 2(1)(w)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 135

Section 135 prescribes the procedure for the inquiry as to the truth of information in preventive bond proceedings, establishing strict six-month limitation timelines and evidentiary standards.

Formal Inquiry Procedure: Conducted as nearly as practicable in the manner prescribed for conducting summons trials.
Evidence on Oath Required: Order cannot be passed on mere police reports; witnesses must be examined on oath and subjected to cross-examination.
Mandatory Six-Month Expiry: Inquiry MUST be completed within six months from commencement; if not completed, proceedings automatically terminate unless the Magistrate records special reasons in writing.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Madhu Limaye v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate (1970) 3 SCC 746: The 7-Judge Constitution Bench held that an order to execute a bond cannot be made without recording evidence in a regular inquiry; the magistrate cannot accept the police report as gospel truth.
S.L. Goswami v. State of M.P. (1972) 3 SCC 415: Affirmed that preventive proceedings cannot be kept hanging over a citizen indefinitely; the six-month statutory deadline is strictly binding.
Rajender Singh Pathania v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2011) 13 SCC 329: Quashed proceedings where magistrates passed bond orders without recording independent oral evidence.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Lethal statutory defence: Calculate 6 months from the date the accused appeared. If 6 months have elapsed and the SDM has not concluded the inquiry or recorded special extension reasons in writing, the proceedings stand automatically terminated under Section 135(6). Move for immediate closure.