Section 135: Discharge of Person Informed Against

Overview

Section 135 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNS) deals with the procedure a Magistrate follows when deciding whether to demand security from a person who has been informed against – meaning someone against whom a complaint has been made, but not yet formally charged. It focuses on the Magistrate’s power to *discharge* that person if security isn’t necessary.

Purpose of the Provision

This provision exists to protect individuals from unnecessary harassment. Sometimes, a complaint is made, but after initial assessment, the Magistrate realizes demanding security (like a bond) from the person complained against isn’t justified. This section allows the Magistrate to formally release that person from the obligation of providing security.

Step-by-Step Procedure

• Step 1 – Magistrate’s Assessment: The Magistrate considers the information received against the person. This includes the complaint and any initial evidence.
• Step 2 – Decision on Security: If the Magistrate is *not* satisfied that demanding security is necessary to keep the peace or ensure good behaviour, they proceed to discharge.
• Step 3 – Order of Discharge: The Magistrate records their reasons for not demanding security and issues an order discharging the person informed against. There are no specific timelines mentioned in the section itself.

Rights and Safeguards

• Right to be Heard: While not explicitly stated, the person informed against generally has the right to present their side of the story to the Magistrate.
• Reasoned Order: The Magistrate *must* record the reasons for discharging the person. This ensures transparency and allows for potential review.
• Protection from Unnecessary Burden: The primary safeguard is preventing the person from being unnecessarily burdened with providing security when it’s not warranted.

Practical Examples

• Example 1: Minor Dispute: A neighbour complains about a minor argument. The Magistrate, after hearing both sides, finds the dispute is trivial and unlikely to escalate. They discharge the person informed against, stating security isn’t needed.
• Example 2: Lack of Evidence: A complaint is filed alleging a threat, but there’s no concrete evidence. The Magistrate determines the complaint is baseless and discharges the person, explaining the lack of supporting evidence.

Difference from Old CrPC Provision (if applicable)

The core principle remains similar to Section 118 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Both provisions allow a Magistrate to discharge a person if security isn’t deemed necessary. The BNS doesn’t introduce significant changes to this fundamental aspect of the procedure.

Key Takeaways

Remember these key points: Section 135 protects individuals from being unfairly required to provide security. The Magistrate *must* record their reasons for discharging a person. This provision emphasizes a quick assessment and release if security isn’t justified, promoting efficiency and fairness in the legal process.