The three new criminal laws have come into effect from 1st July 2024. Many of the State governments ruled by non-BJP parties (the BJP ruled states have to be submissive to the change) have protested against and made appeal to keep the implementation of the laws pending. The three criminal laws viz. Indian Penal Code 1860, Criminal Procedure Code 1973, and Evidence Act 1872 have been replaced with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Bharatiya Sakshya Sanhita (BSS) respectively. Prima facie the replacement is unconstitutional since all the enactments both in name and content must be in English as per Article 348 of Indian Constitution. More than the change of the provisions, the imposition of Sanskrit / Hindi are vividly visible.
Some sort of anti-colonial mind set has prevailed while bringing the replacement for which the change in the names itself is the evidence. But such anticolonial mind set is not reflected in changing the provisions that was relevant only to the colonial rule. Many crimes for instance, ‘sedition’ – has been replaced with ‘secession’ but the inner meaning continues as such as acts against the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the country.
Reckoning the vast changes taken place in Information and Technology, certain changes have been made in the new BNSS. For instance to register an FIR the aggrieved person need not go to the police station. Online registration is accepted. Further, FIR need not be registered in the police station in whose jurisdiction the crime has occurred. It can be registered from anywhere irrespective of the spot of crime. With this provision a new procedure has come into practice; called Zero FIR. This may look apparently positive. But as per the views of lawyers, with the ‘Zero FIR’, a person can be arrested by police from anywhere. It seems to be against the principle of natural justice. It will be like the sharpness existing at both the ends of a sword. The utility of it will be decided as per the desire of the enforcing authority.
Like this, the punishment to drivers, accused in accident cases has been enhanced. The death occurring due to accidents are not of the wilful attitude of the drivers. The death caused due to vehicle accidents are not culpable homicide. It may not be appropriate to punish the drivers but other forms of infringement could be awarded. For the first time provision against mob lynching has been brought in. However the modalities of adhering the provisions only decide the purpose of making the provisions. One more similar change in the provision that looks apparently desirable is yet to be watched for its implementation – that is the statement of a rape victim will be recorded by a woman police officer in the presence of her guardian or relatives and so is the awarding of death sentence or life imprisonment for the gang rape of a minor.
The Union government has narrated that due discussions in the Parliamentary Standing Committees took place and accordingly the changes have been brought about as new criminal laws. Bar Council of India protested against the new criminal laws in line with their state level bodies. Many forums of lawyers are on the agitational path against the new criminal laws.
The three criminal laws are in direct usage in the criminal proceedings of the legal system and their impact on the society is very much significant. Bringing new laws is not an ordinary affair but extra-ordinary step. Whatever Union government says about the consultation and inviting suggestions entertained is applicable to other laws in the ordinary sense. Ordinary process is sufficient for ordinary changes in laws. But extra-ordinary process must be ensured by the government before bringing extra-ordinary changes. The three new Criminal laws are one such extra-ordinary affair!
