Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 191
Complainant and witnesses not to be required to accompany police officer and not to be
No complainant or witness on his way to any Court shall be required to accompany a police officer, or shall be subjected to unnecessary restraint or inconvenience, or required to give any security for his appearance other than his own bond: Provided that if any complainant or witness refuses to attend or to execute a bond as directed in section 190, the officer in charge of the police station may forward him in custody to the Magistrate, who may detain him in custody until he executes such bond, or until the hearing of the case is completed.
Why this exists
This provision protects ordinary citizens—complainants and witnesses—from being treated like suspects or accused persons. Historically, police sometimes misused their power by forcing witnesses to physically accompany them, causing harassment, loss of dignity, and unnecessary inconvenience. The law recognizes that witnesses are helping the justice system voluntarily and should not be burdened with restraints or demands for costly sureties, only a simple personal bond. It balances this protection with a safeguard for the state: if someone genuinely refuses to cooperate despite lawful process, the Magistrate—not the police alone—can enforce attendance through custody.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Witnesses can be treated like accused persons and made to travel under police escort.
Fact: The law specifically forbids requiring witnesses or complainants to accompany police officers or face unnecessary restraint. - Myth: Witnesses must pay money or provide a surety (like a guarantor) to ensure they appear in court.
Fact: Only their own personal bond—a written promise—is required, not financial security from others. - Myth: Police have unlimited power to detain uncooperative witnesses on their own.
Fact: Police can only forward a refusing witness to a Magistrate, who alone decides whether to detain them in custody.