Section 15 BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita): Act of Judge when acting Judicially

Section 15 BNS 2023, protects judges from criminal liability for acts they perform while acting judicially. Specifically, it states that actions taken by a judge in the legitimate exercise of their judicial powers, or good faith believing they have that power, are not considered criminal offenses. This means a judge's actions, even if mistaken, are shielded from criminal prosecution if they acted with the honest belief they were acting within their legal authority. Explore other important Judiciary Notes.

Section 15 BNS: Act of Judge when acting Judicially

Nothing is an offence which is done by a Judge when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which is, or which in good faith he believes to be, given to him by law. 

Note: “The information provided on Section 15 BNS above has been sourced from the official website, i.e., Indian Code. While the content has been presented here for reference, no modifications have been made to the original laws and orders.” 

Download Free PDF on Section 15 BNS 2023 PDF

Section 15 BNS protects judges from being punished under criminal law for anything they do as part of their official judicial work. As long as a judge is doing their job either legally or with a genuine belief that they have the authority to do it, they cannot be held criminally responsible, even if they make a mistake. The key condition under Section 15 of BNS is that they must act in good faith and as part of their judicial duties.

Section 15 BNS Essential Ingredients

Section 15 BNS 2023, which corresponds to Section 77 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), outlines the essential ingredients that protect a judge from criminal liability for actions taken while acting judicially. These essential ingredients are:

• The act must be done by a Judge:

This protection under Section 15 BNS, applies specifically to individuals officially designated as judges. The term "Judge" is defined under Section 2(16) of the BNS (formerly Section 19 of the IPC) and includes anyone empowered by law to give a definitive judgment in legal proceedings.

• The Judge must be acting judicially:

The act under Section 15 BNS must be performed by the judge in their official capacity while carrying out their judicial functions. This means the act must be related to their duties and powers as a judge.

• Exercise of Legal Power or Good Faith Belief in Legal Power:

The act under Section 15 BNS must be done in the exercise of a power that is either:

• Given to them by law: This refers to actions taken within the explicit legal authority granted to the judge.
• Believed in good faith to be given to them by law: Even if the judge makes a mistake and does not technically have the legal power to perform the act, they are still protected if they honestly believe they have that power. Section 15 BNS emphasizes the importance of the judge's good faith and honest belief in their jurisdiction.

The following are the differences between Section 15 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 77 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Section 15 BNS Judicial Interpretation

Judicial interpretation of Section 15 BNS by Indian courts has been crucial in determining the ambit and scope of essential elements of section 15 of BNS, mentioned hereinafter are some of the landmark judgments on section 15 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita :

• K. Veera Raghava Reddy vs State Of Telangana (2016) (Andhra Pradesh High Court):

 This case involved a complaint against a sitting High Court judge. The court discussed the bar to initiating criminal proceedings against a judge for acts done in the discharge of their official or judicial duties, referring to both Section 77 IPC now Section 15 BNS and Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850 (which is similar in principle to Section 77 IPC and the later 1985 Act).

• Vikramsinh Dolatsinh Parmar & 6 vs State Of Gujarat (2015) (Gujarat High Court): 

This case reiterated that only "Judges", as defined in Section 19 IPC when acting judicially, are entitled to immunity under Section 77 IPC now Section 15 BNS. The context was an application for anticipatory bail by individuals who were not judges.

• Hari Shankar Bhardwaj vs. State Of Rajasthan & Ors. (2016) (Rajasthan High Court): 

This case involved allegations against a judicial officer. The court considered the applicability of Section 3 of the Judges (Protection) Act and Section 77 IPC now Section 15 BNS, emphasizing that the protection under Section 77 IPC is available only when the Judge acts judicially and in good faith.

• Mr E.S. Sanjeeva Rao vs Central Bureau Of Investigation (2012) (Bombay High Court):

In this case, the accused sought to quash proceedings against him, arguing that as a Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, his actions were protected under Section 77 IPC now Section 15 BNS and Section 3(1) of the Judges (Protection) Act. The High Court considered the nature of the allegations and the actions taken by the Presiding Officer to determine if they fell within the ambit of "acting judicially" and done in good faith.

Conclusion

Section 15 BNS is a key provision that protects all the actions of judges taken in good faith while performing their judicial duties. However, this protection under Section 15 BNS is not absolute and does not apply to actions clearly outside their judicial power. Courts have consistently interpreted "acting judicially" and "good faith" narrowly to balance the need to protect judges in their work with the necessity of accountability.