Bombay HC raps police for flouting BNSS norms, seeks Centres explanation

The Bombay High Court has strongly criticised Maharashtra Police for failing to comply with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which mandates completion of preliminary inquiries within 14 days. The BNSS replaced the Criminal Procedure Code and came into effect on July 1, 2024. 

A Division Bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, hearing three separate petitions, said police were acting in “utter disregard to the mandate of law” and directed senior officers and the Union Home Ministry to explain the lapses. 

In Kundan Jaywant Patil’s petition, the court observed, “We regularly come across cases wherein the police personnel and/or Police Stations within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court are conducting preliminary enquiries leisurely as per their own whims and caprices and in utter disregard to the mandate of law, i.e., Section 173(3)(i) of BNSS.” 

The Bench noted that inquiries, mandated to conclude within 14 days, “continue for months together,” adding, “Either the police personnel are not aware of the fact that the Government of India has enacted BNSS and it came into effect from 1st July 2024, or they are deliberately not following the mandatory provisions of law for reasons best known to them.” 

The court allowed the petitioner to implead the Union of India through its Home Department and directed notice to the Additional Solicitor General for assistance. The matter will be heard on December 19. 

Advocate Dr. Uday Warunjikar, for Mr. Patil, argued, “Police are hiding behind endless preliminary inquiries. This defeats the mandate of BNSS and harasses complainants.” 

In Mehul Jain’s petition, the Bench questioned Mumbai Police for summoning citizens under obscure references from the Maharashtra Police Manual. It remarked, “We are regularly coming across such instances where citizens of India are being summoned at Police Station by giving reference of ’Movement Register’, which according to us prima facie is not proper.” 

The court directed the Joint Commissioner of Police (Law & Order), Mumbai to clarify whether BNSS applies to Mumbai Police and why officers are issuing summonses under “some unknown procedure even though not prescribed in the police manual.”  

Advocate Rajiv Chavan, for Mr. Jain, said, “My client lodged a complaint against prospective accused, yet he was summoned under a vague reference to ‘Movement Register.’ This is harassment and contrary to BNSS provisions.” 

In Ashwin Ashirvad Parmar’s petition, the court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Kherwadi Division to explain why an inquiry ordered by the Maharashtra State Commission for SC & ST was not completed within 14 days as mandated by BNSS.  

Advocate Kiran Varma, for Mr. Parmar, argued, “The Commission’s directions were clear, yet the police failed to act within the statutory timeline. This defeats the purpose of BNSS.”