SC permits petitions against new criminal laws to be withdrawn

The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed two petitions seeking stay of the three new criminal laws to be withdrawn,noting that petitions challenging constitutionality of a law is a serious issue that needs to be carefully drafted.
A bench headed by justice Surya Kant said, “You need to be very careful as you are challenging the constitutional vires of a provision.” The court was hearing two petitions challenging the three laws , Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam as being ambiguous and not accurate.
Allowing the petitions to be withdrawn, the bench, also comprising justice Ujjal Bhuyan said, “This is such a serious issue and see the grounds you have taken. Do some homework to make out a case by illustrating the consequences of these provisions.”
The order passed by the court said, “The petitioner in both the cases is seeking to withdraw the petitions. The same is allowed with liberty to file a fresh comprehensive petition on the same cause of action.”
One of the petitions was filed by two Delhi residents while the other one was by Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BNS) leader Vinod Kumar Boinapally. Senior advocate S Nagamuthu appearing for the latter requested that instead of withdrawal, he could add additional grounds. However, the court asked him to incorporate the same in a fresh petition.
The petitions also sought formation of an expert committee to examine the three laws as it raised questions over the viability of some of the changes introduced. The petitioners also sought stay of the three laws alleging “irregularity” in the passing of bills in Parliament in December 2023 when nearly 100 Opposition Parliamentarians were under suspension and could not contribute to the debate on the bills.
The bench replied, “Are we now going to have control over Parliamentary proceedings as well?” The court observed that if there were no sound grounds to challenge the laws, it was better not to file such petitions.
The top court had on May 20 refused to entertain a petition filed by advocate Vishal Tiwari challenging the three laws claiming such a challenge to be premature as the laws came into operation only on July 1. Tiwari has since withdrawn the petition.
The present petitions challenged some of the provisions in the new laws as being violative of Supreme Court judgments. It referred to the provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, 2023, (BNSS) allowing police custody of 15 days to be availed in parts or in whole during the initial 40/60 days period of the 60/90 days period of judicial custody permitted under law.
The petitions argued that the issue whether police custody should be restricted to the first 15 days from arrest was laid down by a SC decision in CBI v Anupam J Kulkarni in 1992 which has been referred for reconsideration to a larger bench last year. The petitioners claimed that the new rule on allowing 15 days police custody could lead to denial of bail on the claim by police that they were yet to exhaust the 15-day custody period.
They also challenged the vague definition of “petty organised crime” under the BNS. This includes crimes such as vehicle theft, pickpocketing, selling of public examination question papers, or any other form of organised crimes committed by a gang which must cause a general feeling of insecurity amongst citizens. In this definition, the petition pointed out that the term of “general feelings of insecurity” is vague and is not explained and the term ‘gang’ is not defined. The parliamentary standing committee that reviewed the laws had also suggested redrafting this provision.
The petitions also objected to the new laws permitting use of handcuffs for a range of cases including economic offences. They also questioned the intent of bringing the new laws. “The main motive of the bills was to de-colonise the Indian laws, but, in contrary, the same laws are being repeated with no new explanations with additional powers granted to the police to rule people out of fear and depriving (them) the fundamental rights.”
Seeking an expert committee to be constituted for identifying the viability of the three laws, the petitions said that till such an exercise is done, the implementation of the three new criminal laws should be stayed.