Former Chief Justice of India UU Lalit praised the new criminal laws as a step forward, particularly highlighting the provisions addressing mob lynching. Speaking at an event, he also supported the 15-day police custody rule and welcomed the changes related to hit-and-run cases. Additionally, Lalit acknowledged the removal of the colonial-era sedition law, viewing it as a positive move for India’s legal system.
Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit praised the incorporation of key provisions in the new criminal laws, including measures against mob lynching, the option for 15-day police custody (either in parts or as a whole), and the abolition of the colonial-era sedition law.
He made these remarks during a keynote address on the newly proposed laws the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) at a study circle event organized by the Supreme Court unit of the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad (ABAP).
Comparing the new laws to previous anti-terrorism legislation such as MCOCA, TADA, and POTA, Justice Lalit described the new framework as “the way ahead” for a democratic society. He noted that the BNS defines key terms without introducing invasive procedures, unlike earlier laws that allowed police officers to record confessions.
Lalit also highlighted the “drastic idea” first introduced in MCOCA, which permitted the interception of private telephone conversations, a practice that other states later adopted.
Justice Lalit remarked,
“This invasive approach was seen as a significant intrusion into individual privacy,”
Former Chief Justice UU Lalit referenced the Supreme Court’s 1964 ruling in Masalti vs State of UP, where 40 individuals sentenced to death for their involvement in an unlawful assembly that led to murder.
The court ruled that under Section 149,
“If an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in pursuit of the common object, all members of the assembly are guilty of the offence.”
However, three young men spared the death penalty, as the court found they joined the assembly under pressure from their elders.
Comparing the principles in Masalti to the new provisions against mob lynching under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),
Justice Lalit remarked,
“In normal circumstances, we would rely on Section 149, but if there was a large mob, we would focus on identifying individuals beyond doubt.”
He suggested that with the new definition of mob lynching, “Masalti would perhaps be given a decent burial,” signalling a shift in the interpretation of vicarious liability.
Justice Lalit also praised Section 187 of the BNSS, which replaces Section 167 of the CrPC, allowing police custody for up to 15 days anytime within the initial 40-60 days of detention, calling it a “welcome change” to address tactics used by accused individuals to evade investigation.
Regarding hit-and-run cases under Section 106 (2) of the BNS, he noted,
“If the driver flees the scene without providing medical aid, they can face 10 years in prison. However, if they stay and help, the sentence would be reduced to 5 years.”
Critics have voiced concerns about these provisions, particularly in terror-related offences, but discussions are ongoing with stakeholders like the All India Motor Transport Congress.