Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest
Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest. When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.
(2) When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including---
(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.
(3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, he shall be released on bail; and if a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offence decides that a warrant should be issued in the first instance against that person, he shall issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub-section (1).
(4) Nothing in this section shall apply to any case involving the arrest of any person on accusation of having committed an offence under section 65 and sub-section (2) of section 70 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 482, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 438 Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest Text carried over almost unchanged 96%
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.
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.
-
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Anticipatory bail under section 438 CrPC is not limited by a sunset clause in the Code. The protection may continue until the end of trial, but the court may impose conditions and limit duration on the facts. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia is followed; a contrary line requiring a fixed term is not.
On this section: BNSS 482 is the successor anticipatory-bail provision; Sushila Aggarwal carries forward.
-
Madhav Ganesh vs Martin Sebastian
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Monetary deposit conditions cannot be imposed as a precondition to granting relief in the form of quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 BNSS, particularly when the investigating agency has filed a closure report and no substantial legal or equitable basis exists for such a condition. The court's power to quash proceedings, when properly invoked, should not be made conditional upon the payment of money, as such conditions transform the relief into a punitive measure and place unjustified financial burdens on the parties seeking judicial relief.
On this section: Power of court to quash criminal proceedings; the court applied this section to determine whether the High Court could impose the monetary condition while exercising its inherent powers to quash proceedings
-
Animesh Agarwal vs The State of Chhattisgarh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In bail matters arising from domestic violence allegations, absolute rejection of anticipatory bail is not sustainable when the accused demonstrates responsibility and cooperation with investigation. Relief should be granted through conditional bail upon arrest by the Trial Court, with explicit conditions requiring cooperation with investigation and compliance with statutory bail conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS, rather than through outright anticipatory bail, thereby balancing the accused's right to liberty with the State's interest in effective investigation and victim protection.
On this section: Conditions for granting bail; specifically cited as applicable to this case and used as framework for conditions imposed by Supreme Court (successor to Section 438(2) CrPC)
-
Union of India vs Padam Narain Aggarwal Etc
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A court cannot grant blanket anticipatory bail protecting an accused from arrest for any non-bailable offence, nor can it impose conditions such as prior notice before arrest on the statutory power of arrest vested in investigating authorities under section 104 of Customs Act. Anticipatory bail must be specific to identified offence(s), based on applicant's reasonable apprehension of arrest for a non-bailable offence, and cannot include conditions that interfere with or obstruct the legitimate investigative authority and statutory powers of arrest. The jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail is discretionary but must be exercised within statutory limits and cannot be used to impose judicial obstacles to investigation.
On this section: Provision for granting anticipatory bail. Court extensively analyzed that anticipatory bail must be specific to offence(s), cannot be blanket, must be based on reason to believe founded on reasonable grounds, and becomes operative only upon arrest. No power to impose conditions like prior notice.
-
Sudeep Chatterjee vs The State of Bihar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Conditions for anticipatory bail must be reasonable, practicable, and directed towards ensuring a fair trial/investigation; onerous conditions that make the grant of bail illusory or impossible to perform are legally unsustainable.
On this section: Provisions for grant of bail to persons apprehending arrest.
-
Sasikala Pushpa vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A clerical error or incorrect statement regarding date and place in a procedural document like a vakalatnama, where the party admits to the genuine signatures and provides a plausible explanation for the error, does not constitute forgery or fraud upon the court warranting criminal prosecution under Sections 193, 466, 468, and 471 IPC. Fraud requires mens rea (criminal intention) to deceive and cause wrongful gain or loss. Before exercising jurisdiction under Section 340 Cr.P.C. to direct a criminal complaint, the court must be satisfied that it is 'expedient in the interest of justice' by weighing the effect on administration of justice, not merely the injury to a person. A mere incorrect statement in a procedural document that has no bearing on the merits of the case and causes no demonstrable harm to the administration of justice does not justify criminal prosecution.
On this section: Anticipatory bail; basis for bail applications filed by appellants
-
Vaman Narain Ghiya vs State of Rajasthan
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requires that an accused person must be in actual custody to file a bail application before the High Court or Court of Session. The protective umbrella provided by anticipatory bail under Section 438 is of limited duration, intended only to allow the accused to move the regular court for bail. Once that limited period expires, the accused cannot bypass the statutory requirement of Section 439 by seeking to extend Section 438 protection. The distinction between Sections 438 and 439 must be maintained, and no part of the statute can be rendered redundant or dead letter by circumventing the express requirement of custody under Section 439.
On this section: Deals with anticipatory bail for persons apprehending arrest; applied to grant protective orders with limited duration
-
Narendra K Amin vs State of Gujarat
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a trial court while granting bail acts on irrelevant materials or takes into account irrelevant materials of substantial nature, the High Court or superior court can cancel such bail under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 without requiring supervening circumstances, as the order granting bail becomes vulnerable on account of the perversity arising from consideration of irrelevant materials. The parameters for granting bail and canceling bail are different. While re-appreciation of evidence should be avoided, consideration of irrelevant materials renders the bail order liable for cancellation.
On this section: Anticipatory bail granted on June 4, 2007 which was later cancelled
-
Umar Ansari vs State of Uttar Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal antecedents of an accused are a relevant consideration in bail matters but are not an absolute bar to granting anticipatory bail. Where co-accused persons have been granted bail and the core attribution of criminal conduct is disputed to be a matter of trial, bail may be granted with appropriate conditions ensuring trial participation and court appearance, provided the court is satisfied that the case has factual and legal merit for such grant.
On this section: Provision relating to anticipatory bail; Supreme Court SLP filed challenging High Court order under this section
-
Abdulla vs The State of Uttar Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Interim protection against arrest in criminal matters may be granted to accused individuals, but such protection must be conditional upon: (1) compliance with statutory requirements under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, (2) diligent and active participation in the trial proceedings before the trial court, (3) commitment to refrain from conduct that would generate further legal complaints, and (4) an implicit waiver of the right to claim prejudice if trial court takes action based on subsequent complaints. The grant of such interim protection is discretionary and subject to modification if the accused fails to honor these conditions.
On this section: Section 438(2) compliance was mandated as a condition for interim protection against arrest. The Court used this provision to ensure that the bail conditions are properly structured and documented.
-
Ravish Kumar vs The State of Bihar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the police investigation absolved the accused of criminal involvement yet the court proceeds with cognizance and registration of the FIR based on the original complaint, the peculiar circumstances may justify granting anticipatory bail even for serious criminal offences, subject to appropriate conditions imposed by the trial court.
On this section: Anticipatory bail provisions, under which the petitioner sought protection from arrest
-
Arumugam vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a petitioner has been granted interim protection for a considerable period and there is no evidence of violation or change in circumstances, the Supreme Court may confirm such interim protection and convert it into a substantive bail order with specified conditions, taking into account the nature of allegations and the petitioner's compliance record.
On this section: The Court applied the provisions relating to anticipatory bail and its conversion into final bail upon arrest, considering the nature of allegations and the period for which interim protection has been enjoyed
-
Bijen Chandra Singh vs The State of Jharkhand
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 438, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a co-accused in the same case has been admitted to regular bail and interim protection has already been granted to an accused whose employment is at jeopardy, the balance of convenience favors confirming anticipatory bail with conditions imposed by the trial court to ensure investigation cooperation and trial attendance, rather than denying bail entirely.
On this section: Provision governing anticipatory bail; the court considered the petitioner's entitlement to protection against arrest in anticipation of criminal charges related to causing death by negligence
-
Reena Devi vs State (govt of Nct of Delhi)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An appellate court will not interfere with an acquittal judgment when the trial court has properly appreciated the evidence and correctly applied the burden of proof standard (beyond reasonable doubt). The acquittal judgment of the trial court is upheld when the appellate court finds no perversity or misapplication of law in the trial court's reasoning.
On this section: Inherent powers of court - read with Section 430 for securing presence of accused
-
Santosh Singh Uttam Bisen vs Govt Nashik Taluka Police Station, Nashik)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the weapon of offence is already recovered from the spot and the remaining allegations are largely oral in nature arising from a property dispute, custodial interrogation may be dispensed with for certain accused, unless specific heinous acts (like outraging modesty or specific flag desecration) are attributed to an individual.
On this section: Provision for anticipatory bail (equivalent to old Section 438 CrPC).
-
Salil Shripad Mehendale vs The State of Maharashtra through Manpada Police Station
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An application for anticipatory bail may be disposed of as premature if the police have issued a Section 35(3) BNSS notice and undertaken to provide prior notice (e.g., 72 hours) before any actual arrest.
On this section: Provision for grant of anticipatory bail.
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 482
What have the courts held on Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (29 Jan 2020) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 438, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: BNSS 482 is the successor anticipatory-bail provision; Sushila Aggarwal carries forward. Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 13 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 482 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 482, section 482 BNSS, section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 482(2) and bnss 482 in crpc. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (29 Jan 2020).
What should I read with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 70 (Gang rape), section 65 (Service of summons on corporate bodies, firms, and societies), section 480 (When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence), so none of them can safely be read on its own. It carries forward CrPC 438 (Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, commonly called anticipatory bail, and cited as BNSS 482, 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.