India’s Parliament has recently undertaken a historic overhaul of the country’s criminal justice system by passing three significant bills. These legislative changes are aimed at replacing the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and the Indian Evidence Act with the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, and Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Sanhita, respectively.
Also read-Lok Sabha Passes Key Bill On Election Commission Appointments Amid Debate (lawchakra.in)
Initially introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11, the bills underwent scrutiny by a parliamentary committee led by Brij Lal. Following the committee’s report on November 10, the bills were withdrawn and then reintroduced by Home Minister Amit Shah on December 12 in an effort to streamline the amendment process.
A significant amendment influenced by the Indian Medical Association’s request was the reduction of liability for medical professionals in cases of death due to negligence. Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita now specifies a two-year punishment for medical practitioners in such cases, compared to the general five-year term.
The Rajya Sabha passed these bills through a voice vote, with Chairman Jagdeep Dhankar highlighting their role in moving away from India’s colonial criminal jurisprudence legacy. The Lok Sabha had previously cleared these bills amidst the suspension of 141 opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) from both houses, a decision that sparked controversy.
Also read-Lok Sabha Passes 3 Criminal Law Amendment Bills, Amit Shah Presents (lawchakra.in)
The proposed criminal law bills faced scrutiny from opposition leaders like Adhir Ranjan Choudhary and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who expressed concerns over potential human rights violations and the lack of safeguards against law enforcement excesses. However, Home Minister Amit Shah defended the bills, emphasizing their shift from colonial-era laws to a focus on justice, reformation, and a citizen-centric justice system. He also pointed out the bills’ emphasis on digitization and the mandatory video recording of search and seizure procedures.
The standing committee made several key recommendations, including the retention of a gender-neutral form of the offence of adultery and a provision similar to Section 377 of the IPC to criminalize sexual offences against men, non-binary persons, and animals. It also suggested provisions for the secure handling of electronic and digital records as evidence. While some recommendations were incorporated, others remained unchanged, with Shah noting that most changes were grammatical.
The passing of these bills marks a pivotal moment in India’s legal history, signaling a shift towards a more modern, just, and citizen-focused criminal justice system. These reforms aim to address the evolving societal and technological needs, balancing effective law enforcement with the protection of individual rights and freedoms. As these new laws are implemented, they are set to significantly influence the landscape of criminal jurisprudence in India.