A notice from a Sub-Divisional Magistrate asking a person to show cause why they should not furnish a bond to keep the peace often causes more alarm than it should — and sometimes less than it deserves. These are peace bond or security proceedings under the chapter of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 comprising Sections 125 to 143 (corresponding to Sections 106 to 124 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). They are preventive, not penal: no one is being prosecuted, and the bond itself creates no conviction or criminal record. But they carry real consequences, including detention for a person who is ordered to furnish security and fails to do so. This article explains how the proceedings work before Executive Magistrates in Delhi and what a person served with such a notice should do.
A preventive jurisdiction, centuries old in design
Most of criminal procedure looks backwards: an offence has occurred and the machinery responds. The security chapter of the BNSS looks forward. It permits an Executive Magistrate to require a person to give a bond — with or without sureties — to keep the peace or to be of good behaviour, where circumstances suggest a risk of future breach.
The provision most often encountered is Section 126 BNSS (formerly Section 107 CrPC): where an Executive Magistrate receives information that a person is likely to commit a breach of the peace, the Magistrate may require that person to show cause why they should not execute a bond for keeping the peace for a period the Magistrate fixes. Neighbourhood disputes, rival factions, property standoffs and apprehended clashes are the staple diet of this jurisdiction.
The statutory spine: three sections to know
Three provisions structure the proceeding.
Section 126 BNSS — the trigger
Formerly Section 107 CrPC. Information reaches the Executive Magistrate that a person is likely to commit a breach of the peace. The Magistrate decides whether there is sufficient ground to proceed.
Section 130 BNSS — the written order
Formerly Section 111 CrPC. Before anything else, the Magistrate must make a written order setting out the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond, the period for which it is to be in force, and the number and character of sureties, if any. This order is the foundation of the entire proceeding.
Section 135 BNSS — the inquiry
Formerly Section 116 CrPC. The Magistrate inquires into the truth of the information. The person proceeded against participates, evidence is taken, and the procedure followed is, as nearly as practicable, that prescribed for summons cases. Only if the information is found true can security be ordered.
The Section 130 order deserves emphasis. Because the person must know exactly what they are to show cause against, the order must disclose the substance of the information — not a bare recital that information has been received — and must specify the bond amount and period. An order that fails to do this is vulnerable.
How the notice usually arrives in Delhi
In Delhi, these proceedings run before Executive Magistrates — in practice, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the area. The usual route is through the police: after a quarrel, a complaint, or an assessment of local tension, they prepare a report, commonly called a kalandra, and forward it to the SDM. If the SDM is satisfied that there is ground to proceed, a preliminary order is drawn up and notice is served, often through the same police station. Receiving the notice through a constable leads many people to assume they have been made an accused; they have not, but the notice must still be answered on the date fixed.
Preventive, not penal — and why that matters
Nothing in these proceedings results in a conviction. The bond is a conditional promise: keep the peace for the stated period, or the bond amount may be forfeited. Executing the bond is not an admission of wrongdoing, and the proceeding does not, by itself, generate a criminal record. But the preventive label is no reason for complacency. A person finally ordered to furnish security who fails or refuses to do so can be detained in the manner the chapter provides — a serious deprivation of liberty in a proceeding where no offence was ever proved. The safeguards built into the chapter matter correspondingly.
The respondent's options
A person served with notice broadly has three courses. First, appear and contest: insist on the Section 130 order being read over, test the information at the Section 135 inquiry, cross-examine, and lead evidence that no apprehension exists. Second, appear and offer the bond: where the dispute has genuinely cooled, executing a modest bond for a limited period can be the pragmatic end of the matter, since it admits nothing. Third, negotiate the terms: the amount, the period and the requirement of sureties are all open to submissions, and must be fixed with reference to the person's circumstances, not mechanically. What a respondent should never do is ignore the notice, since proceedings can continue in their absence.
Pending FIRs, protests and public order
Security proceedings often run alongside a registered FIR arising from the same incident. The two are independent: the criminal case looks at past conduct, the security proceeding at future risk. The chapter is also invoked in situations of public assembly and protest. Here the preventive power intersects with constitutionally protected speech and assembly, and courts expect restraint: the apprehension must be genuine, specific to the person, and supported by material, not deployed as a routine instrument against gatherings as such. A person who believes the power has been used against lawful activity should raise that squarely at the inquiry and, if necessary, in revision.
Safeguards and challenge
Three safeguards anchor the chapter. The preliminary order must show application of mind — real material, considered by the Magistrate, specific to the person proceeded against. The inquiry must actually be held and must follow summons-case procedure as nearly as practicable; security cannot be demanded on the kalandra alone. And the orders of the Executive Magistrate are open to revision before the Court of Session, with the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court available beyond that. Defects in the Section 130 order, a non-existent or perfunctory inquiry, and disproportionate bond amounts or periods are the grounds most commonly urged.
First response: a practical checklist
- Read the notice carefully: note the issuing Magistrate, the provision invoked, and the date of hearing.
- Appear on the date fixed and seek copies of the kalandra and the Section 130 BNSS order if not supplied.
- Check that the preliminary order states the substance of the information, the bond amount and the period; note any omission for the record.
- Decide a strategy early: contest the inquiry, offer a bond on negotiated terms, or seek discharge for want of any present apprehension.
- If an FIR from the same incident is pending, keep the two proceedings distinct and avoid statements in one that complicate the other.
- Preserve material showing the absence of apprehension — settlement of the dispute, distance from the locality, the one-off nature of the incident.
- If an adverse order issues, obtain a certified copy promptly and consider revision to the Court of Session.
Peace bond proceedings sit in a quiet corner of criminal procedure but touch ordinary people often. Understood correctly — preventive in purpose, bounded by a written order and a real inquiry, and reviewable in revision — they can be met calmly and, where they overreach, resisted effectively.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a peace bond proceeding a criminal case against me?
No. Security proceedings under Sections 125 to 143 BNSS are preventive, not punitive. There is no charge, no trial for an offence, and no conviction. Executing a bond to keep the peace does not by itself create a criminal record. The proceeding only seeks an assurance, backed by a bond, that the person will keep the peace or be of good behaviour for a defined period.
Who conducts peace bond proceedings in Delhi?
Executive Magistrates, not Judicial Magistrates. In Delhi this ordinarily means the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the area. The police typically forward a report, commonly called a kalandra, to the Executive Magistrate, who then decides whether to initiate proceedings and issue notice. The courtroom is the SDM's office, and the procedure at the inquiry follows that of a summons case.
What happens if I refuse to sign the bond?
Refusal is not itself an offence, and a person is entitled to contest the proceedings through the inquiry. But if, after inquiry under Section 135 BNSS, the Magistrate finds the information true and orders security, a person who fails to furnish the bond can be detained in the manner the chapter provides. The decision to offer, negotiate or contest a bond should therefore be made with advice, not reflexively.
Can an order demanding security be challenged?
Yes. The order is subject to revision before the Court of Session, and the superior courts retain their supervisory jurisdictions. Common grounds include that the preliminary order under Section 130 BNSS does not set out the substance of the information, the bond amount or the period; that no genuine inquiry was held; or that the order shows no application of mind to material specific to the person proceeded against.