CrPC 133-143 vs BNSS 152-162: Public Nuisance Orders (2026)

In India, Sections 152 to 162 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced Sections 133 to 143 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) from 1 July 2024. The conditional-order procedure is unchanged, but proceedings now carry a ninety-day completion proviso, hearings may be by video, and disobedience attracts Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

At a glance

CrPC	BNSS	Subject	Key rule (BNSS text)	Change
133	152	Conditional order for removal of nuisance	DM, SDM or specially empowered Executive Magistrate; six grounds (a)–(f); order not to be questioned in a Civil Court	Identical (see the "configuration" print defect below)
134	153	Service or notification of order	Served as a summons, or notified by proclamation and a copy "stuck up"	Minor edit
135	154	Person to whom order is addressed to obey or show cause	Perform the act or appear and show cause; appearance or hearing may be by audio-video conferencing	Expanded
136	155	Penalty for failure to comply with section 154	Liable to the penalty in Section 223 BNS; order made absolute	Minor edit (cross-reference to BNS 223; heading)
137	156	Procedure where existence of public right is denied	Inquiry into denial; stay if reliable evidence supports it	Minor edit (renumbered)
138	157	Procedure where person appears to show cause	Evidence as in a summons-case; order made absolute if "reasonable and proper"; new ninety-day completion proviso	Modified (new proviso)
139	158	Local investigation and examination of an expert	Magistrate may direct a local investigation or summon an expert	Minor edit (renumbered)
140	159	Written instructions and costs	Instructions, expenses and costs of local investigation or expert	Minor edit (renumbered)
141	160	Order made absolute; consequences of disobedience	Notice; Magistrate may cause the act to be performed and recover costs; Section 223 BNS	Minor edit
142	161	Injunction pending inquiry	Injunction to prevent imminent danger or injury of a serious kind	Minor edit (renumbered)
143	162	Prohibiting repetition or continuance of public nuisance	DM, SDM, empowered Executive Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner of Police	Expanded

Penalty and classification for disobedience: Section 223 BNS — (a) simple imprisonment up to 6 months, or fine up to Rs 2,500, or both; (b) where the disobedience causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety or a riot or affray, imprisonment up to 1 year, or fine up to Rs 5,000, or both. The BNSS First Schedule lists both limbs as cognizable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate. Section 188 IPC provided 1 month or Rs 200, and 6 months or Rs 1,000; the CrPC First Schedule classified it as cognizable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate. The classification is unchanged; the maxima are higher.

These sections form Part B ("Public nuisances") of Chapter XI of the BNSS (Chapter X of the CrPC). Urgent orders in cases of nuisance or apprehended danger (Part C) are covered on the Section 144 CrPC vs Section 163 BNSS page; the offence of public nuisance itself is on the Sections 268, 290–291 IPC vs Sections 270, 292–293 BNS page.

What changed

Substantive changes

Modified — Section 157(3) (CrPC 138(3)), time limit: a proviso is added: "Provided that the proceedings under this section shall be completed, as soon as possible, within a period of ninety days, which may be extended for the reasons to be recorded in writing, to one hundred and twenty days." The heading becomes "Procedure where person against whom order is made under section 152 appears to show cause" (CrPC: "Procedure where he appears to show cause").
Expanded — Section 154 (CrPC 135), video hearing: "(b) appear in accordance with such order and show cause against the same" is followed by "and such appearance or hearing may be permitted through audio-video conferencing".
Expanded — Section 162 (CrPC 143), who may prohibit repetition: "any other Executive Magistrate empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate" becomes "any other Executive Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner of Police empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate"; "public nuisance, as defined in the Indian Penal Code" becomes "... as defined in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023".
Modified (by cross-reference) — Sections 155 and 160 (CrPC 136 and 141): "the penalty prescribed in that behalf in section 188 of the Indian Penal Code" becomes "the penalty specified in that behalf in section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023". The words of the procedure are otherwise the same, but the penalty behind them is higher (see At a glance).

Drafting changes

Identical — Section 152 (CrPC 133): word for word the same, including sub-section (2) and the Explanation defining "public place". The India Code CrPC text prints clause (1)(c) as "likely to occasion configuration or explosion"; Section 152(1)(c) reads "likely to occasion conflagration or explosion". This page treats the CrPC reading as a print defect in the India Code text, not a change (see Sources).
Minor edit — Section 153 (CrPC 134): "in the manner herein provided for service of a summons" becomes "... for service of summons"; the comma after "proclamation" is dropped; and a copy is to be "stuck up" (CrPC: "struck up").
Minor edit — Section 155 (CrPC 136): the heading "Consequences of his failing to do so" becomes "Penalty for failure to comply with section 154"; "If such person does not perform such act" becomes "If the person against whom an order is made under section 154 does not perform such act". On a reading of Sections 152 and 154 together, the order is made under Section 152 and Section 154 states the duty; the cross-reference is printed as "section 154" in the Gazette.
Minor edit — Section 160 (CrPC 141): "within a time to be fixed" becomes "within the time to be fixed"; "he will be liable" becomes "he shall be liable"; cross-references to Sections 136 and 138 become Sections 155 and 157.
Minor edit — Sections 156, 158, 159 and 161 (CrPC 137, 139, 140 and 142): cross-references renumbered (133 → 152, 137 → 156, 138 → 157, 139 → 158); otherwise word for word the same.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 138(3) CrPC (repealed from 1 July 2024):

If the Magistrate is not so satisfied, no further proceedings shall be taken in the case.

Extract, Section 157(3) BNSS with its proviso:

If the Magistrate is not so satisfied, no further proceedings shall be taken in the case: Provided that the proceedings under this section shall be completed, as soon as possible, within a period of ninety days, which may be extended for the reasons to be recorded in writing, to one hundred and twenty days.

Extract, Section 162 BNSS:

A District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate, or any other Executive Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner of Police empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate in this behalf, may order any person not to repeat or continue a public nuisance, as defined in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, or any special or local law.

How it works — the conditional-order procedure

Information (Section 152(1)): the Magistrate acts "on receiving the report of a police officer or other information and on taking such evidence (if any) as he thinks fit".
Grounds (Section 152(1)(a)–(f)): an unlawful obstruction or nuisance in a public place, way, river or channel; a trade, occupation or stock of goods "injurious to the health or physical comfort of the community"; a construction or disposal of a substance likely to occasion conflagration or explosion; a building, tent, structure or tree likely to fall; an unfenced tank, well or excavation next to a way or public place; a dangerous animal.
Conditional order (Section 152(1)(i)–(vi)): the person must, within a fixed time, remove, desist, regulate, stop, repair, fence or dispose — "or, if he objects so to do", appear and show cause why the order should not be made absolute. No such order duly made "shall be called in question in any Civil Court" (Section 152(2)).
Service (Section 153): as a summons; if that is not possible, by proclamation and a copy stuck up where it will best reach the person.
Obey or show cause (Section 154): perform the act or appear; appearance or hearing may be by audio-video conferencing. Doing neither makes the order absolute and the person liable under Section 223 BNS (Section 155).
Denial of a public right (Section 156): where the order concerns a way, river, channel or place, the Magistrate must ask whether the person denies the public right. If there is "any reliable evidence in support of such denial", the Magistrate stays the proceedings until a competent Court decides; a person who does not deny it then, or fails to adduce reliable evidence, cannot deny it later (Section 156(3)).
Showing cause (Section 157): evidence is taken "as in a summons-case"; the order is made absolute, with or without modification, if "reasonable and proper", otherwise "no further proceedings shall be taken"; the ninety-day completion proviso to Section 157(3), quoted above, applies.
Aids (Sections 158 and 159): local investigation or an expert, with written instructions and directions on costs; the investigator's report "may be read as evidence".
Enforcement (Section 160): notice to perform within a fixed time; on default, the Magistrate may have the act performed and recover the cost by sale of property; no suit lies for anything done in good faith.
Interim injunction (Section 161): where "imminent danger or injury of a serious kind to the public" calls for immediate measures, pending determination.

What this means in practice

For residents or a municipal body complaining of a nuisance

Approach the District Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate or a specially empowered Executive Magistrate (Section 152(1)); the Magistrate may act on "other information", not only a police report.
For a trade or stored goods under clause (1)(b), Kachrulal (below) requires the interference with public comfort to be considerable and to affect a large section of the public, not one household.
For a repeat nuisance, Section 162 now also lets a Deputy Commissioner of Police, if empowered, order the person not to repeat or continue it.

For the person served with a conditional order

Within the time fixed, either comply or appear and show cause (Section 154). Ask for a hearing through audio-video conferencing if appearing in person is difficult; the section says it "may be permitted".
If the order concerns a way, river, channel or place and you dispute that the public has a right there, say so when questioned and produce reliable evidence (Section 156); silence at that stage bars the denial later.
Track the ninety-day proviso in Section 157(3). The text fixes the period and requires written reasons for any extension up to one hundred and twenty days; it does not state what follows if the period runs out. That consequence is not settled by the text and no judgment on it was found.

For advocates

Prosecuting disobedience under Section 223 BNS: Section 215(1)(a)(i) BNSS bars cognizance of offences under Sections 206 to 223 BNS (excluding Section 209) except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or a public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate or whom he authorises.
Kedia Leather (below) keeps Section 133 available alongside the pollution statutes; Ratlam (below) treats the power as one the Magistrate must exercise when the jurisdictional facts are present.

Judgments that still matter

Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Shri Vardhichand & Ors., [1981] 1 S.C.R. 97 (1980 INSC 138) — 29 July 1980. Krishna Iyer J., for a Bench with O. Chinnappa Reddy J., heard a municipality's special leave petition against orders under Section 133 CrPC requiring it to remedy open drains and insanitary conditions. The Court said: "Section 133. Cr.P.C. is categoric, although reads discretionary. Judicial discretion when facts for its exercise are present, has a mandatory import" (p. 109), and that the Code "operates against statutory bodies and others regardless of the cash in their coffers" (p. 108). It upheld the High Court's view and the Magistrate's order, saying "Wherever there is a public nuisance, the presence of s. 133 Cr.P.C. must be felt" (p. 112), and then modified the directions into a costed scheme with time limits and inspection by the Magistrate every three months (pp. 112–113), and dismissed the petition subject to those modifications (p. 115). The report prints no paragraph numbers. Section 152 BNSS repeats the words the Court construed.

State of M.P. v. Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. and Ors., [2003] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 727 (2003 INSC 405) — 19 August 2003. A Sub-Divisional Magistrate had ordered industrial units to close under Section 133 CrPC; the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 had impliedly repealed Section 133 for pollution by bodies covered by those Acts. Pasayat J., for a Bench with Doraiswamy Raju J., held there was no implied repeal: the provisions "operate in their respective fields and there is no impediment for their existence side by side", Section 133 being preventive while the two Acts are "not only curative but also preventive and penal" (p. 734). The Court described Section 133 as applying to a nuisance in existence at the time of the order, said the person proceeded against "is not an accused", and said the proceedings are "more in the nature of civil proceedings than criminal proceedings" (p. 732). The appeals were partly allowed; the Court expressed no opinion on whether there was an infraction on the facts (p. 734).

Kachrulal Bhagbirath Agrawal and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., [2004] Supp. 4 S.C.R. 597 (2004 INSC 538) — 22 September 2004. A wholesale dealer stored dry chillies in a godown in a residential area. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate prohibited storage under Section 133(1)(b) and Section 138; a revisional court set that order aside; the Bombay High Court restored it. Pasayat J., for a Bench with C.K. Thakker J., dismissed the dealer's appeal (p. 607). The Court said proceedings under Section 133 "are not intended to settle private disputes between different members of the public", that under clause (1)(b) "it must be shown that the interference with public comfort was considerable and a large section of the public was affected injuriously", and that "community" means "the public at large or the residents of an entire locality" (p. 605). It directed that any suggestion for regulating the storage be considered by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in accordance with law (p. 607). Section 152(1)(b) BNSS repeats the clause.

No Supreme Court judgment construing Sections 152 to 162 BNSS was found.

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that any "appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation" pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is disposed of, continued, held or made in accordance with the CrPC "as if this Sanhita had not come into force". On a reading of that text, public-nuisance proceedings under Sections 133 to 143 CrPC pending on that date continue under the CrPC, without the ninety-day proviso in Section 157(3) BNSS; proceedings started on or after that date follow Sections 152 to 162 BNSS. On a reading of Article 20(1) of the Constitution, the higher maxima in Section 223 BNS cannot be imposed for disobedience committed before 1 July 2024. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNSS equivalent of Section 133 CrPC? Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 133 CrPC from 1 July 2024. A District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate or a specially empowered Executive Magistrate may make a conditional order requiring a person to remove an obstruction or nuisance, regulate a trade, stop a construction, repair a dangerous structure, fence a tank or excavation or dispose of a dangerous animal, or else appear and show cause.

Is there now a time limit for public nuisance proceedings? Yes. A proviso to Section 157(3) BNSS says the proceedings under that section shall be completed, as soon as possible, within a period of ninety days, which may be extended for reasons recorded in writing to one hundred and twenty days. Section 138 CrPC had no time limit.

Can a person appear by video in a Section 152 BNSS proceeding? Section 154 BNSS provides that the person against whom the order is made shall perform the act directed or appear and show cause, and that such appearance or hearing may be permitted through audio-video conferencing. Section 135 CrPC contained no such provision.

Who can prohibit a person from repeating a public nuisance under the BNSS? Under Section 162 BNSS, a District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate, or any other Executive Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner of Police empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate, may order any person not to repeat or continue a public nuisance as defined in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or any special or local law. Section 143 CrPC did not mention a Deputy Commissioner of Police.

What is the penalty for disobeying a nuisance order under the BNSS? Sections 155 and 160 BNSS refer to the penalty in Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Section 223(a) provides simple imprisonment up to six months, or fine up to Rs 2,500, or both; Section 223(b), where the disobedience causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety or a riot or affray, provides up to one year, or fine up to Rs 5,000, or both. Section 188 IPC provided one month or Rs 200, and six months or Rs 1,000.

Is the Magistrate bound to act when there is a public nuisance? In Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand ([1981] 1 S.C.R. 97), the Supreme Court said Section 133 CrPC is categoric although it reads discretionary, and that judicial discretion has a mandatory import when the facts for its exercise are present. It also said financial inability does not exonerate a municipality. Section 152 BNSS repeats the words of Section 133.

Can Section 133 CrPC be used against a polluting factory? In State of M.P. v. Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. ([2003] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 727), the Supreme Court held that the Water Act, 1974 and the Air Act, 1981 did not impliedly repeal Section 133 CrPC, that the provisions operate in their respective fields and can co-exist, and that Section 133 can be used to remove a public nuisance caused by effluent and air discharge. Section 152 BNSS carries the same words.

Can Section 133 be used for a dispute between neighbours? In Kachrulal Bhagbirath Agrawal v. State of Maharashtra ([2004] Supp. 4 S.C.R. 597), the Supreme Court said Section 133 proceedings are not intended to settle private disputes between members of the public but to protect the public as a whole, and that under clause (1)(b) the interference with public comfort must be considerable and affect a large section of the public. Section 152(1)(b) BNSS repeats the clause.

Sources

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 152 to 162, 215(1)(a) and 531(2)(a); First Schedule entries for Section 223 BNS.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 223 and 270.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (India Code text): Sections 133 to 143; First Schedule entry for Section 188 IPC, Ditto entries traced.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (India Code text): Section 188.
Judgments read in full text, with the report PDFs: Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand (1981_1_97_115_EN.md); State of M.P. v. Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. (S_2003_2_727_734_EN.md); Kachrulal Bhagbirath Agrawal v. State of Maharashtra (S_2004_4_597_607_EN.md).
Source note: the India Code CrPC text prints "configuration" in Section 133(1)(c); Section 152(1)(c) BNSS reads "conflagration". The enacted CrPC text was not available to confirm which word the 1973 Act used.

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.

Sections 133–143 CrPC vs Sections 152–162 BNSS — Magistrate's Orders for Removal of Public Nuisance