सं Samvidhan

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Section 125

Security for keeping peace on conviction

Why this exists

This provision continues a long-standing preventive justice tradition in Indian criminal procedure (earlier found in Section 106 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). The idea is that punishment alone may not stop a person from causing further trouble after release; requiring a bond to keep the peace gives courts a tool to deter repeat violence or intimidation, especially in cases involving assault, mischief, rioting-type offences, or threats, without needing a fresh criminal case if the person misbehaves again.

How courts read it

Under the predecessor provision (Section 106 CrPC), courts consistently held that ordering security for keeping the peace is discretionary and must be based on the judge's genuine satisfaction that the convict is likely to cause a breach of peace again, not a mechanical add-on to every conviction. Courts have also emphasized that the bond period cannot exceed the statutory maximum, and that if the underlying conviction is set aside in appeal or revision, the bond automatically falls away, since it draws its legal force entirely from the conviction.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: A peace bond is an automatic punishment given in every conviction.
    Fact: Courts must specifically believe it is 'necessary' before ordering a peace bond; it is not automatic and applies only to certain listed offences.
  • Myth: The peace bond lasts however long the judge wants.
    Fact: The law caps the bond period at a maximum of three years.
  • Myth: Only a Magistrate can pass this order.
    Fact: Sessions Courts, Appellate Courts, and courts exercising revision powers can also make this order, not just first-class Magistrates.