Imprisonment in default of security
Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with imprisonment in default of security. (a) If any person ordered to give security under section 125 or section 136 does not give such security on or before the date on which the period for which such security is to be given commences, he shall, except in the case next hereinafter mentioned, be committed to prison, or, if he is already in The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) (a) If any person ordered to give security under section 125 or section 136 does not give such security on or before the date on which the period for which such security is to be given commences, he shall, except in the case next hereinafter mentioned, be committed to prison, or, if he is already in prison, be detained in prison until such period expires or until within such period he gives the security to the Court or Magistrate who made the order requiring it;
(b) if any person after having executed a bond or bail bond for keeping the peace in pursuance of an order of a Magistrate under section 136, is proved, to the satisfaction of such Magistrate or his successorin-office, to have committed breach of the bond or bail bond, such Magistrate or successor-in-office may, after recording the grounds of such proof, order that the person be arrested and detained in prison until the expiry of the period of the bond or bail bond and such order shall be without prejudice to any other punishment or forfeiture to which the said person may be liable in accordance with law.
(2) When such person has been ordered by a Magistrate to give security for a period exceeding one year, such Magistrate shall, if such person does not give such security as aforesaid, issue a warrant directing him to be detained in prison pending the orders of the Sessions Judge and the proceedings shall be laid, as soon as conveniently may be, before such Court.
(3) Such Court, after examining such proceedings and requiring from the Magistrate any further information or evidence which it thinks necessary, and after giving the concerned person a reasonable opportunity of being heard, may pass such order on the case as it thinks fit:
Provided that the period (if any) for which any person is imprisoned for failure to give security shall not exceed three years.
(4) If security has been required in the course of the same proceeding from two or more persons in respect of any one of whom the proceedings are referred to the Sessions Judge under sub-section (2) such reference shall also include the case of any other of such persons who has been ordered to give security, and the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) shall, in that event, apply to the case of such other person also, except that the period (if any) for which he may be imprisoned, shall not exceed the period for which he was ordered to give security.
(5) A Sessions Judge may in his discretion transfer any proceedings laid before him under sub-section (2) or sub-section (4) to an Additional Sessions Judge and upon such transfer, such Additional Sessions Judge may exercise the powers of a Sessions Judge under this section in respect of such proceedings.
(6) If the security is tendered to the officer in charge of the jail, he shall forthwith refer the matter to the Court or Magistrate who made the order, and shall await the orders of such Court or Magistrate.
(7) Imprisonment for failure to give security for keeping the peace shall be simple.
(8) Imprisonment for failure to give security for good behaviour shall, where the proceedings have been taken under section 127, be simple, and, where the proceedings have been taken under section 128 or section 129, be rigorous or simple as the Court or Magistrate in each case directs.
Section 141, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 122 Imprisonment in default of security Text carried over almost unchanged 98%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Inala Manoj vs The State of Telangana
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 122, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Mere arraignment in a criminal offence cannot be taken as conviction or breach of bond for good behaviour furnished under Section 110 Cr.P.C. An Executive Magistrate cannot order penalty for breach of bond without establishing that the accused has been convicted of the underlying offence. Detention based on alleged breach of bond without conviction is illegal and the detenu must be released immediately.
On this section: Powers of Executive Magistrate to order payment of penalty - the court examined the validity of the notice issued under this section
-
Pedagopi Gurrayya vs State of Andhra Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 122, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A Mandal Executive Magistrate cannot enforce a bond executed under Section 110 CrPC (bond for good behavior) using procedures meant for Section 117 CrPC (bond for keeping the peace), particularly the arrest provisions under Section 122(b) CrPC. The procedural distinction between these two types of bonds must be strictly observed, and failure to follow the correct procedure renders the forfeiture proceedings invalid and subject to quashing by the High Court under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.
On this section: Arrest of persons who breach bonds - the court examined whether this section was properly invoked for a Section 110 bond
-
Bandi Sridevi vs The State of Telangana
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 122, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Mere arraignment in a criminal offence cannot be taken to be a conviction whereby it could be said that the accused had committed a breach of the bond furnished by him for maintaining good behaviour. Therefore, the exercise of power under Section 122(b) Criminal Procedure Code to impose penalty based on mere implication in an offence, without conviction, is unsustainable and illegal.
On this section: Powers of executive magistrate to order payment of penalty; the court held that this power cannot be exercised based on mere arraignment without conviction
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 141
What have the courts held on Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Inala Manoj vs The State of Telangana (25 May 2017) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 122, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Powers of Executive Magistrate to order payment of penalty - the court examined the validity of the notice issued under this section. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2016 to 2017.
How do I find court cases under Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 141, section 141 BNSS, section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 141 1 b and bnss 141 1. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Inala Manoj vs The State of Telangana (25 May 2017).
What should I read with Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 125 (Security for keeping peace on conviction), section 127 (Security for good behaviour from persons disseminating certain matters), section 128 (Security for good behaviour from suspected persons), section 129 (Security for good behaviour from habitual offenders), and on 1 further provision, so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward CrPC 122 (Imprisonment in default of security), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 141 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 141, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.