New criminal laws: People's rights compromised, govt wields more power

Legal experts and activists opposed its implementation, saying broader discussions must have taken place across the country before the laws were enforced.

They argue that though the new laws were presented as part of an exercise in decolonising criminal law, there was more to it. Curiously, around 75 per cent of the existing provisions have been retained verbatim in the new laws, they noted.

Lawyer and activist Jaha Ara said these new laws safeguarded the interest of the establishment (state apparatus) and its enforcement agencies rather than protecting the accused or defending the citizens’ constitutional rights.

She said the term of police custody has been extended from 15 days to 60 or 90 days depending on the nature of criminal offence. Police powers have been widened compared to the old laws. Now, arrests can be made without warrant and property attachments can be done without a magistrate’s permission.


“There would be restrictions on personal liberty. Minimum accountability leads to arbitrary powers to the police,” she said.

On the positive side, sedition law has been abolished and electronic evidence made admissible. Contemporary issues related to modern technology and the digital era were addressed to some extent, she said.

“The reference to the nation’s name as Bharat, removing ‘India’, is a sign of hegemony of Hindi domination over the southern, non Hindi speaking states,’’ the activist said.

State president of CITU, Narsinga Rao said the new laws gave more powers to the executive and some of the UAPA provisions were incorporated in section 113 of IPC. There should have been a discussion on these in the parliament and outside. The government hurried through the bill after 141 MPs of the Opposition were suspended over a ruckus in parliament, Narsinga Rao said.