Introduction

• Background: The enactment of three new criminal laws as of July 1, 2024, has been criticized for reinforcing colonial-era provisions rather than modernizing the legal framework in line with democratic principles and contemporary liberal thought.
• Government Mindset: There is a perception that the government''s approach to these laws is more damaging than that of colonial rulers, as it perpetuates and expands existing powers rather than reforming them.

Expansion of Police Powers

Extended Police Custody:

• Previous System: The Code of Criminal Procedure allowed police to detain an individual for up to 15 days from the date of arrest, subject to magistrate approval.

       New Provisions:

• Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), police can now extend custody up to 40 days if a charge sheet is due within 60 days or 60 days if a charge sheet is due within 90 days.
• This extension of custody could effectively lead to prolonged detention without bail, as judges are unlikely to grant bail during ongoing investigations, even if the accused is eventually found innocent.

Jurisdictional Overreach:

• Previous System: Traditionally, police had jurisdictional limits and could only act within their area of authority.

        New Provisions:

• Police officers can now arrest individuals and investigate offenses outside their territorial jurisdiction.
• The investigation must be reported to a magistrate in the jurisdiction where the offense was committed, which complicates the legal process and raises concerns about federalism and state autonomy.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)

Extended Custody:

          Detailed Provisions:

• Police custody can be extended up to 40 days with a charge sheet to be filed within 60 days, or up to 60 days with a charge sheet due in 90 days.
• The extended period of police custody diminishes the likelihood of bail, impacting the accused’s ability to contest detention.

Jurisdictional Authority:

          New Powers:

• Police can arrest and investigate offenses beyond their jurisdictional boundaries.
• This provision undermines the federal structure by centralizing investigative powers and complicating jurisdictional responsibilities.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

Broad and Vague Provisions:

Section 152:

• Provides for life imprisonment or up to 7 years for actions that excite secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities, or that endanger national sovereignty and unity.
• The broad language allows for potential misuse and can target various forms of expression, including media and electronic communication.

Section 113:

• Defines terrorist acts as those threatening national unity, economic security, or causing damage to essential services.
• Acts like public protests or strikes resulting in property damage could be classified as terrorist acts, with severe penalties for those who harbor or support such acts.

Organized Crime:

Section 111:

• Targets ongoing economic offenses involving multiple people, with potential penalties ranging from death to life imprisonment.
• Applies to individuals with prior charges related to similar offenses, indicating a focus on repeat offenders and organized crime.

Issues with the New Laws

Potential Misuse:

• The broad and vague definitions in the new laws could be exploited to suppress dissent and target political opponents.
• Provisions overlap with existing laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), creating a complex and potentially contradictory legal framework.

Implementation Concerns:

• The laws could lead to arbitrary actions by law enforcement, with insufficient checks and balances to prevent abuse.
• The potential for misuse is heightened by the lack of clear guidelines and the broad discretion granted to police officers.

Legislative Process Criticism

Lack of Consultation:

• The laws were enacted without adequate consultation with legal experts and civil society groups.
• Critics argue that this reflects a disregard for democratic processes and the views of stakeholders.

Historical Context:

• There is concern that these laws echo past practices used to suppress dissent and target those critical of the government.
• The laws are viewed as a continuation of authoritarian practices rather than a move toward progressive legal reform.

Conclusion

• The new criminal laws are criticized for reinforcing colonial-era provisions, expanding police powers, and undermining democratic and federal principles.
• The legislation reflects an autocratic mindset, with broad provisions that could be used to stifle dissent and suppress political opposition, rather than modernizing the criminal justice system in alignment with contemporary democratic values.