India’s parliament recently approved three groundbreaking bills in what has been hailed as the most significant overhaul of the nation’s criminal justice system since the colonial era. The new laws, aimed at modernizing outdated legislation inherited from British rule, replace the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Indian Evidence Act.
Introduced by Home Affairs Minister Amit Shah, the bills garnered attention as they were expedited through parliament in the absence of more than 40 opposition MPs, who had been suspended for protesting an unrelated matter. Shah emphasized the necessity of eliminating archaic references to the British monarchy and other “signs of our slavery.”
The sweeping reforms include provisions to extend police custody detention from the existing 15-day limit to an extended period of up to 90 days. Notably, the legislation incorporates terror, corruption, and organized crime into ordinary law while simultaneously decriminalizing homosexuality and adultery.
For the first time, the act of obtaining sex by promising marriage to a woman is classified as a crime, carrying a stringent 10-year sentence. The new laws also introduce a precise definition of consent. In cases where a jail sentence of seven years or more is applicable, the legislation mandates the use of forensic evidence, prompting the establishment of additional labs across the country.
Despite the government’s assertion that these changes are crucial for a progressive legal framework, critics argue that the reforms grant excessive power to authorities. Human rights lawyer Colin Gonsalves expressed concern about the provision allowing the extension of police custody, describing it as a “shocking” measure that could facilitate police torture.
One notable omission highlighted by critics is the absence of a provision for legal aid from the point of arrest, a departure from the current legal framework. Gonsalves pointed out the significance of this lapse, emphasizing the potential impact on the rights of the accused.
Legal experts and rights campaigners argue that the new legislation fails to address over-criminalization and, instead, reinforces state and police authority. Senior Supreme Court lawyer Shahrukh Alam criticized the codes for perpetuating opacity, ambiguity, and arbitrariness, warning against the concentration of power reminiscent of colonial and authoritarian regimes.
Political scientist Pratap Bhanu Mehta sharply criticized the bills, asserting that in the guise of decolonization, they confer arbitrary power to the state. Mehta highlighted the lack of public outcry or meaningful opposition debate, attributing it to a dearth of appetite for constitutional reforms.
Former director of the National Judicial Academy, G. Mohan Gopal, expressed disappointment in the bills, stating that they fall short in enhancing police accountability and could potentially escalate repression. He underscored the rushed parliamentary process, lamenting the lack of substantial debate on laws that will significantly impact the lives of all Indians.
The overhaul of India’s criminal justice system reflects Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ongoing campaign to rid the country’s political institutions of remnants of colonial rule. The bills are expected to become law upon formal assent from President Draupadi Murmu, a procedural formality.