New criminal laws will ‘promote police raj’, say section of lawyers

AGRA: The Centre’s decision to reform the country’s criminal justice system by replacing the ‘colonial-era’ Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Indian Evidence Act with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) have drawn criticism from some lawyers and civil society groups in UP.
Lawyers said the rules, which came into effect on Monday, were “hastily rolled out”, saying it hasn’t given them enough time to understand the changes. They’ve also raised concerns that the laws will increase the reach of the state, perhaps tilting the balance in its favour.
The main point of concern is the change in police custody rules. Section 187 of BNSS, which seeks to replace the CrPC, says that “police custody of 15 days can be authorised in whole or in parts at any time during the initial 40 or 60 days out of the 60- or 90-day period of judicial custody”.
Senior lawyer Prashant Pundhir from Etah said, “Earlier, police custody was permitted for a maximum period of 15 days, and that too could be sought only in the first 15 days following the arrest. BNSS allows police to make requests for custody beyond 15 days. On the face of it, extending powers of the police to request custody up to the initial 60 days (after arrest) is a retrograde step. It is opposed to the fundamental right of citizens and promotes police raj.”
The BNS introduces a new offence of “terrorism”, which is defined broadly as any act that “intends to threaten the country’s unity, integrity and security, intimidate the general public or disturb public order”. Lucknow-based lawyer Mohammed Kumail Haider said, “This expansive definition raises concerns that minor local disturbances could be labeled as ‘terrorism’, leading to disproportionate punishments. It will further strengthen the draconian UAPA...”
Notably, chapter VII of the BNS has a significant addition or change regarding the offence of sedition, which was present in the IPC under Section 124-A. Chapter VII of the BNS provides for offences against the state. The colonial-era ‘sedition’ terminology has been removed and Section 152 of the BNS has introduced it in the form of as “acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India, for which imprisonment for life or up to seven years and fine has been prescribed”. Section 124-A of the IPC punished a person “who brought or attempted to bring into hatred or contempt or excites disaffection towards the govt established by law in India”. Section 152 expands the scope of the gravity of the offence by including within it the act of also using electronic communication or use of financial means, any ‘subversive activities’, feelings of ‘separatist activities’ or endangers ‘sovereignty or unity and integrity of India’.
“Despite the Supreme Court freezing IPC Section 124-A in 2022, the new law retains the concept of sedition,” pointed out Agra-based lawyer Bharatendra Singh. He added: “This time, it’s broader and vague. It will surely be challenged, as will other provisions.”
Agra division president of Yuva Adhiwakta Sangh, Nitin Verma, said, “The changes will have an impact on a wide group of people -- from the police, witnesses, victims, common citizens, and the judiciary. It will be challenging for courts, too, which continue to function with fewer judges and an overburden of pending cases. The new laws certainly increase the reach of the state.”