A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the implementation of three recent sets of laws aimed at overhauling India’s penal codes. The petitioner claims that these laws exhibit numerous “defects and discrepancies.” On December 21, the Lok Sabha passed three crucial legislations—namely, the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bills.
Subsequently, President Droupadi Murmu granted her assent to these bills on December 25.
These new laws, namely the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Act, are slated to replace the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Indian Evidence Act.
Advocate Vishal Tiwari filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a halt to the enforcement of the three laws, highlighting that they were enacted without a parliamentary debate as most opposition members were under suspension. The plea urges the court to promptly establish an expert committee to evaluate the feasibility of these new criminal laws.
The plea argued, “The new criminal laws are significantly draconian, establishing a police state in reality and infringing upon every provision of fundamental rights of the people of India. If the British laws were considered colonial and draconian, then the Indian laws now appear far more draconian. During the British period, a person could be detained in police custody for a maximum of 15 days. Extending this period to 90 days and beyond is a shocking provision enabling police torture.”
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita encompasses offenses such as acts of secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, separatist activities, or actions endangering the sovereignty or unity—essentially a new iteration of the sedition law.
According to the new laws, any individual purposefully or knowingly inciting secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, encouraging separatist sentiments, endangering sovereignty or unity through words, signs, visible representation, electronic communication, financial means, or other means, shall be subject to punishment with life imprisonment or imprisonment of up to seven years, along with a fine.
Contrary to IPC Section 124A, which addresses sedition and imposes punishment with life imprisonment or a three-year jail term, the new laws introduce ‘Deshdroh’ as a replacement for ‘Rajdroh,’ excluding any reference to the British crown. In essence, Rajdroh signifies rebellion against the ruler, whereas Deshdroh pertains to acts against the nation.
Furthermore, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita introduces a definition of terrorism, a term previously absent in the IPC. The new laws also expand the magistrate’s authority to impose fines and widen the scope of declaring someone a proclaimed offender for the first time.
