The three new criminal laws have come into force in the country, amidst widespread fears that the policing and judicial systems are not yet ready for their introduction. Barring reports of some rudimentary training to station-house police personnel, some workshops here and there, and an upgrade to the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems, which will help ease the filing of complaints in electronic form, the exact level of preparedness among the upper and lower echelons of the police is unknown. Earlier the government had appointed July 1 as the day on which the three laws — the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in place of the Indian Penal Code, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to supersede the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, which has replaced the Indian Evidence Act — will come into force. It appears that the Union government decided that it is better to implement them and let the police, courts and lawyers fumble their way towards a rough transition than await a time when everyone involved in the administration of criminal law is brought up to speed. How much the initial period of possible confusion will last is anybody’s guess. There is little doubt that more time ought to have been given to the police and legal fraternity to prepare themselves before the codes were brought into force.
The very names of the new laws appear obscure, with many questioning why there is no English equivalent for the new codes, and why they should bear unfamiliar Hindi names. There was no change in the name of the criminal procedure code when the 1898 original was replaced with a new one in 1973. There is also a persistent feeling that the laws were not fully debated in the legislature — even though a Standing Committee of Parliament went into the draft and recommended some changes — or widely discussed with civil society. There is a looming fear that some of the new provisions, especially the one relating to police custody that can be availed of in multiple tranches, will sharply empower the police to the citizen’s disadvantage. The inclusion of ‘terrorism’ as an offence in ordinary penal law in addition to the present special anti-terrorism law is bound to cause confusion. The Centre’s announcement that States are free to make their own amendments is fine, but there is no assurance that such amendments will get early Presidential assent. Some procedural reforms such as registering FIRs regardless of jurisdiction and introduction of videography of searches and seizures are welcome initiatives, but there is a palpable sense of uncertainty over the overall impact of these new laws.
