Today(on 19th July), a Division Bench of Justices S.S. Sundar and N. Senthilkumar will hear the petitions challenging the constitutionality of new laws replacing the Code of Criminal Procedure, IPC, and Evidence Act. Filed by DMK organising secretary R.S. Bharathi, the PILs target the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Chennai: R.S. Bharathi, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) organizing secretary, has taken a significant legal step by filing three public interest litigation (PIL) petitions in the Madras High Court. These petitions seek to declare the three newly enacted laws, which have replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, Indian Penal Code, and Indian Evidence Act from July 1, as unconstitutional.
Today( on 19th July), The three PILs have been scheduled for admission before a Division Bench consisting of Justices S.S. Sundar and N. Senthilkumar. These cases target the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which have taken the place of the old criminal laws.
In his affidavit, Bharathi expressed grave concerns over the manner in which the new laws were enacted. He stated that the laws were passed with undue haste and without proper deliberations. According to him, the enactment of these laws was –
“clearly arbitrary and beyond the scope of the Constitution.”
He argued that a close examination of the new laws reveals-
“a deliberate attempt to weaponize the laws by criminalizing democratic and peaceful expressions of dissent.”
Bharathi further elaborated on his concerns by highlighting how the new laws undermine fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence, including the right to a free and fair trial. He pointed out that the new legal framework systematically dismantles these core principles, which are essential for the administration of justice.
ALSO READ: “New criminal laws mockery of Constitution”: Journalist Teesta Setalvad
He also raised alarm over the centralization of police powers under these new laws, stating that “the powers of the police had been centralized with impunity.” Bharathi argued that this centralization of power poses a significant threat to civil liberties and democratic rights.
Moreover, Bharathi criticized the provision of immunity to state officials under the new laws. He contended that these provisions grant state officials excessive protection, which could lead to abuses of power without accountability.
“State officials were granted immunity under the laws.”
– he said, emphasizing the potential for misuse of such immunity.
The petitions filed by Bharathi seek a thorough judicial review of the new laws, urging the Madras High Court to scrutinize their constitutionality and their impact on democratic rights and civil liberties. By bringing these matters to the court, Bharathi aims to ensure that the principles of justice, fairness, and accountability are upheld in the criminal justice system.
ALSO READ: Union Home Ministry Stays Provisions in New Criminal Laws After Delhi Bar Associations’ Protests
