JUDICIAL ACTS AND THEIR PROTECTION UNDER THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023.
Judicial acts refer to actions carried out by a judge or a person following court orders within the scope of judicial authority. In India, Sections 15 and 16 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (formerly Sections 77 and 78 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), provide specific protections to judges and individuals acting on court orders, shielding them from criminal liability.
Section 15 of BNS: Protection for Judges Acting Judicially
Section 15 BNS (formerly Section 77 IPC) grants immunity to judges from criminal prosecution for any actions taken while performing their judicial duties. If a judge performs an act in the course of their judicial functions, or in good faith believes they are exercising lawful authority, they are not considered to have committed an offence.
Key Points:
Who is Protected? Judges acting in their judicial capacity.
Conditions for Protection: The judge must be performing duties either:
- Under legal authority given to them by law, or
- Under a good faith belief that they possess such authority.
Limitations: This immunity does not extend to acts done with malicious intent or outside the scope of judicial powers.
Illustration:
A judge sentencing a person to death in the course of a lawful trial is not liable for that person’s death. The action is protected under Section 15 BNS, provided the judge acts within the law or in good faith believes they have the authority to do so.
Judicial Clarification:
In Surendra Kumar Bhatia vs. Kanhaiya Lal & Others (2009), the Supreme Court held that only individuals formally recognized as judges, as defined under Section 19 of IPC (now Section 2(16) of BNS, 2023), are entitled to the protection under Section 15 BNS. This clarification ensures that the immunity applies strictly to those acting in an official judicial capacity, reinforcing the scope of protection granted to judges.
Case Law:
Megh Raj vs Zakir Hussain (1875): The Allahabad High Court held that a judge is not criminally liable for acts done in the discharge of their official duties, as long as they are within the scope of their jurisdiction. Even if there is an abuse of power, the judge remains protected as long as the act is performed within their jurisdiction.
Notes on Application:
1. Mistake of Fact: The section covers acts where a judge mistakenly believes they have authority, provided this belief is in good faith.
2. Good Faith: The judge must prove that their actions were performed in good faith, meaning honestly and without intent to cause harm.
Section 16 of BNS: Protection for Acts Done Under Court Orders
Section 16 BNS (formerly Section 78 IPC) provides immunity to any person who performs an act in compliance with a judgment or order of a court, even if the court lacked jurisdiction. The key condition is that the person executing the order must have believed in good faith that the court had authority to issue such an order.
Key Points:
Who is Protected? Individuals executing court orders, such as officers of the court.
Conditions for Protection: The act must be:
- Done in accordance with a judgment or order that is still in force, and
- Performed in the good faith belief that the court had the jurisdiction to issue the order.
Limitations: This protection does not cover situations where the act is performed without a good faith belief in the court’s authority.
Illustration:
An officer who arrests someone based on a court order cannot be held criminally liable for false imprisonment, even if it is later discovered that the court lacked the jurisdiction to issue that order, provided the officer believed in good faith that the order was lawful.
Case Law:
Kapur Chand vs State (1976): A magistrate issued an order allowing the husband to withdraw his wife’s property without her consent. It was later held that the husband had not committed any offence, as he acted under **Section 16 BNS* (formerly Section 78 IPC), believing the magistrate had jurisdiction to pass the order.
Notes on Application:
1. Mistake of Law: Under this section, individuals can claim a mistake of law as a defence, provided they acted in good faith under the court’s order.
2. Court Orders: The immunity is extended even if the court order is later found to have been issued without proper jurisdiction, as long as the person executing it believed the order was legitimate.
Comparative Overview of Section 15 and Section 16 BNS:
| SECTION 15 | SECTION 16 |
| Protects judges from criminal liability for judicial acts performed in the courts of their duties. | Protects individuals acting on court orders, even if the court lacked jurisdiction, provided they acted in good faith. |
| Applicable when the judge believes they have lawful authority or acts under the powers granted by law. | Applicable when an individual follows a court judgment believing the court had authority to issue it. |
| Protection is limited to judicial acts and does not cover malicious acts or actions outside the judge’s authority. | Protects those executing court order, but not if they acted without a good faith belief in the courts jurisdiction. |
Sections 15 and 16 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 provide essential protections to ensure that judges and individuals executing court orders can perform their duties without fear of criminal liability. These provisions maintain judicial independence and safeguard legal actors from undue prosecution while balancing the need for accountability, ensuring that acts performed maliciously or beyond the scope of authority do not receive protection.
