Central idea

The government wants to change some important laws in India, causing questions about making them more modern and fair. The study says that the government should be very careful when making these changes to ensure that the new laws are fair and work well. The main idea is to check and fix the laws to make sure they are right for today.

Definitions and drafting of new bills

• Mental Illness Exception in IPC Replacement Bill: The new Bill, replacing the IPC, introduces a provision exempting individuals suffering from mental illness from being considered offenders. This marks a shift from the previous term “unsound mind.”
• Definition Alignment with Mental Healthcare Act, 2017: The definition of mental illness in the Bill aligns with the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, aiming to provide medical treatment to those with mental illness. Notably, mental retardation or incomplete development is excluded, while abuse of alcohol or drugs is included.
• Differential Exemption Based on Condition: The new Bill grants full exemption to individuals addicted to alcohol or drugs under the mental illness exception. However, those unable to understand the consequences of their actions due to mental retardation are not granted the same exemption.
• Retention of Obsolete Illustrations: The existing laws, including the IPC, incorporated illustrations from daily life to explain their provisions. Despite some illustrations becoming obsolete, they have been retained in the new Bill.
• Need for Modernization in Illustrations: Recognizing the changing times, there is a suggestion that the illustrations, such as people riding chariots, firing cannons, and being carried on palanquins, should be updated to reflect contemporary events from modern life. This aims to enhance the relevance and clarity of the legal framework.

Seven issues related to modernising jurisprudence

• Exclusion of Civil Law: The Bills are questioned on whether they appropriately exclude civil law issues, despite the CrPC’s provisions for post-divorce maintenance and compounding certain offences. The new Bills retain these provisions.
• Reformative vs. Punitive System: The Bills’ approach towards a reformative system is examined with the introduction of community service as a punishment. However, non-compoundability of minor offences, leading to trial and conviction, raises concerns.
• Integration of Public Order and Prosecution: The CrPC’s structure, encompassing public order and criminal prosecution, is retained in the new Bills, prompting consideration on whether this integration is appropriate.
• Codification of Supreme Court Directions: The Bills are critiqued for not codifying various Supreme Court directions, excluding procedures for mercy petitions, thus creating potential gaps in the legal framework.
• Consistency of Implementation: The Bills’ retention of wide sentencing ranges for certain offences is examined for its impact on ensuring consistency in implementing penalties across cases.
• Age Provisions for Modern Norms: The need for updating age provisions in line with modern norms is questioned, specifically exploring whether age thresholds for criminal responsibility should be raised.
• Update of Gender-Related Offences: The Bills align with Supreme Court judgments by removing Section 377 and addressing gender-related offences. However, the omission of making marital rape an offence, despite recommendations from the Justice Verma Committee in 2013, is noted.

Key Phrases from article to fetch good marks in mains:

• Legislative Overhaul
• Reformative vs. Punitive
• Public Order and Prosecution
• Supreme Court Directions
• Consistency of Implementation
• Gender Offenses

Critical analysis

The bills offer a legislative overhaul, but challenges arise in areas of overlap with special laws, gaps in Supreme Court directions, and concerns about consistency in sentencing. The debate over reformative vs. punitive systems, age thresholds, and gender offenses adds complexity to the proposed changes.

Key Data:

• IPC Enacted: 1860
• CrPC Enacted: 1973
• IEA Enacted: 1872
• Legal Metrology Act, 2009
• Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
• Mental Healthcare Act, 2017

Overlap of new laws with special laws

• Historical Context of IPC: The IPC, established in 1860, serves as the primary legislation outlining offenses and penalties, shaping the foundation of the Indian legal system.
• Issue of Duplication and Inconsistency:Concerns arise as the IPC, along with the proposed replacement Bill, continues to specify certain offenses and penalties, leading to duplication and inconsistencies across various laws.
• Addressing Specific Overlaps: Positive instances of addressing overlaps are noted, such as the removal of IPC provisions related to weights and measures by the Legal Metrology Act, 2009.
• Persistent Overlaps in New Bill: Despite some adjustments, the new Bill, like the IPC, exhibits overlaps with several other Acts, including those related to food adulteration, sale of adulterated drugs, bonded labor, and rash driving.
• Abortion as an Offense: Noteworthy is the retention of abortion as an offense in the new Bill, even though the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 permits it under specific conditions.
• Maintenance of a Parent Provision: The Bill replacing CrPC maintains the provision for the maintenance of a parent, despite a specific Act passed in 2007 addressing this matter. This raises questions about consistency and necessity.

Way Forward:

• Parliament needs to carefully examine the bills to ensure fairness, justice, and efficiency in the criminal justice system.
• Address concerns related to overlap with special laws, sentencing ranges, and gaps in codifying Supreme Court directions.
• Consider updating outdated illustrations and ensuring clarity in definitions for a modernized legal framework.
• Deliberate on the debate over reformative vs. punitive systems, age thresholds, and gender-related offenses for a comprehensive legislative approach.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now