Increased Police and Magistrate Powers under BNSS: A Cause for Concern or Procedural Efficacy?
- NLR Journal
- Jul 16
- 1 min read
By Abhijay Singh, Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla.
Abstract
Through victim-centric changes (such as direct asset distribution under S.107) and procedural modernization (required audiovisual evidence under S.185), the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) represents a revolutionary departure from colonial criminal process. This report highlights a crucial conflict, though: whereas the BNSS improves rights in some areas, it also increases police and judiciary authority without sufficient protections, raising the possibility of systemic abuse. Central concerns include preventive powers, preliminary enquiries, handcuffing, and ex-parte asset attachments. The historical abuse of these powers against dissidents and underprivileged communities is demonstrated by judicial precedents (Medha Patkar, Rajender Singh Pathania). A rights-protection deficiency results from the BNSS's limited operational scopes or lack of strong transparency requirements (such as written reasons and judicial oversight timetables). The study comes to the conclusion that the BNSS runs the possibility of sustaining colonial-era authoritarianism under the pretense of indigenization if immediate changes are not made, such as sunset clauses for attachments and court consent for handcuffing. This would place the onus of protecting rights on an overworked judiciary.
