The Lok Sabha passed three significant bills on Wednesday, ushering in a comprehensive overhaul of India’s criminal laws. These bills include the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, 2023; the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, 2023; and the Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill, 2023. Among the notable changes are the extension of police custody detention from the current 15-day limit to up to 90 days, the inclusion of terror, corruption, and organized crime under ordinary legislation, and the decriminalization of homosexuality and adultery.
Once enacted, these bills will replace the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860; The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (originally enacted in 1898); and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, who piloted the bills, emphasized their aim to indigenize laws originally enacted by the British.
According to the government, three provisions symbolic of colonial influence in the IPC – sedition, criminalization of homosexuality, and adultery – have been repealed. However, a closer look reveals that the offense of sedition, currently inoperable due to a Supreme Court order, has undergone a name change from ‘rajdroh’ to ‘deshdroh.’
During the debate on the bills in the House, marked by empty benches in the Opposition block due to the suspension of 97 Opposition members, Shah defended the provisions of the bills. He specifically addressed the changes in sedition provisions and the definition of terrorism, asserting that any act against the nation would be punishable.
Shah used the opportunity to criticize the Congress, stating that these laws represent a departure from the British era and Congress rule. He asserted, “This is not the rule of the British. This is not the rule of Congress. This is the rule of BJP and Narendra Modi… No argument of saving terrorism will work here.” Shah expressed pride in the changes, claiming that, for the first time, laws are being crafted in line with the spirit of the Indian Constitution under Modi’s leadership. He also took a swipe at the Gandhi family, suggesting that understanding would come to those who embrace an Indian mindset, contrasting it with a mindset associated with Italy.
Introduced during the final day of the monsoon session of Parliament in August, the three Bills underwent scrutiny by a Parliamentary standing committee before receiving approval in the Lok Sabha. Chaired by BJP MP Brij Lal, the committee engaged stakeholders in nine meetings over six days from September to October.
While the committee’s report generally expressed approval for the laws, it recommended certain changes. Opposition members, including Congress leader P Chidambaram and TMC leader Derek O’Brien, dissented, expressing concerns about limited consultation time and the selection of domain experts.
Highlighting achievements, Home Minister Amit Shah listed BJP’s fulfilled promises, such as the removal of Article 370 and 35-A and the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya. Shah emphasized the government’s commitment to personal liberty, human rights, and equality as the basis for the new laws, contrasting them with the foreign-imposed laws of the British era.
Shah stated that wide-ranging consultations took place, with 3,200 suggestions received. He personally held 158 sittings to thoroughly review the Bills introduced on August 11. The Standing Committee submitted its report on November 10.
Shah detailed changes in criminal justice laws, noting that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, 2023, would have 531 sections, with 177 sections modified, 9 new sections, and 39 sub-sections added. Changes to the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were outlined, with 358 sections in the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, including 31 new offenses, increased imprisonment for 41 offenses, higher penalties for 82 offenses, and compulsory minimum punishment for 25 offenses. The Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill, 2023, has 170 sections, with 24 modified, two new sections, and six repealed, according to Shah.
The Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) aims to replace the Indian Penal Code and introduces significant provisions, making mob lynching and hate crimes distinct offenses for the first time. Home Minister Amit Shah emphasized the severity of these offenses by prescribing a punishment ranging from life imprisonment to the death penalty. He criticized the Congress for not addressing mob lynching adequately during its 70-year rule.
Shah highlighted an official amendment reducing punishment for doctors in culpable homicide cases. While the initial version proposed a five-year jail term for deaths caused by rash or negligent acts, the amended version exempts registered medical practitioners, prescribing a jail term of up to 2 years.
Another noteworthy change is the provision allowing victims to register a zero-FIR at any police station, which must be compulsorily transferred to the relevant police station within 24 hours. The scope for declaring someone a fugitive has expanded, covering 120 crimes, compared to the previous 19.
During the debate involving 35 participants, AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi opposed the Bills, describing them as felonious attempts to provide legal cover for government actions. He expressed concern about the impact on the lives of the poor, Dalits, and Muslims, emphasizing the need to address provisions enabling arbitrary government and police actions.
Harsimrat Kaur Badal of the SAD raised concerns about the excessive powers granted to the police and emphasized the importance of open discussion on the Bills. She also highlighted the case of Balwant Singh Rajoana, who has been on death row for 28 years, criticizing the new law restricting applications for mercy to family members.
Simranjit Singh Mann of SAD (Mann) criticized the undemocratic practice of discussing the Bills in the absence of the Opposition. Despite the concerns raised, all three Bills were ultimately passed by a voice vote.
