Section 24 of the Prevention of Money Laundering (PMLA) Act, 2002 defines “Burden of Proof,” which places the onus on the accused to prove that the proceeds of the crime are untainted property.

Related: What Is the Burden of Proof Under the Indian Evidence Act?

What Is the Burden of Proof Under Section 24 of the PMLA?

Under section 24 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, there is a provision regarding the burden of proof. In the case of a person accused of the offence of money laundering as defined under section 3 of the PMLA, the authority or the court is required to presume that the proceeds of crime involved are indeed engaged in money laundering. For other individuals, the authority or the court has the discretion to assume that the proceeds of crime are being used for the purpose of committing money laundering.

Recent Case Laws

You can get more context about the burden of proof from these case laws.

Union of India vs Hassan Ali Khan, 2011 AIR SCW 6592

The allegations that the money was the product of a crime and that the accused attempted to portray it as clean money by depositing it in his bank accounts may not ultimately be proven, but because the allegations or claims were made, the onus of proving that the money was not the product of a crime and therefore was not tainted shifted to the accused under section 24 of the Act.

Jignesh Kishorebhai Bhajiawala vs State of Gujarat, 2017 (4) Gujarat LR 3462

The onus of proof falls on the accused to establish that the sum recovered or involved does not constitute “proceeds of crime” as defined by the Act. He must also convince the authority of this.

Aman Krishanlal S. S/o. Shri Krishan Lal S. vs Assistant Director, (Gujarat), 2015 (4) Crimes 295

Section 24 reference to the burden of proof applies to the proceeds of crime.

Smt. Janata Jha vs Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India, 2014 Cri LJ 2556

A case in which the accused has been acquitted in a sessions trial on charges related to sections 307, 353, and 357 of the Indian Penal Code but faces a subsequent proceeding under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, involving different procedures and evidentiary standards, cannot be deemed a case of double jeopardy.

Hasan Ali Khan vs Union of India, 2012 (1) Bom C R (Cri) 807

According to section 24 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, it is the defendant’s responsibility to demonstrate that the claimed proceeds of crime are legitimate assets. It should be clear that this section does not absolve the prosecution of the duty to claim specifically that the funds allegedly being laundered were obtained via the commission of a specified scheduled offence or offences under the PMLA. This clause cannot be interpreted as requiring the accused to establish his right to the money in question once the prosecution only alleged that he was engaging in money laundering.

B Rama Raju vs Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, represented by its Secretary [Revenue] New Delhi, 2011 (3) ALT 443

The legislative goals are only realized when the onus is placed on the accused to prove that the proceeds of crime are untainted property, as camouflage and deceit are tactics inherent and integral to money laundering operations and may involve subsequent transactions relating to proceeds of crime and intent to project the layered proceeds as untainted property. Section 24 of the PMLA was written with this legislative goal and justification.

To sum up: The burden of proof under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act of 2002 lies upon the accused person to prove that the proceeds of the crime are not tainted property.

What Is the Burden of Proof Under the PMLA?
Dinesh Verma

Ranjit D. Udeshi vs State of Maharashtra on 19 August 1964
Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 1962
Date of Judgment: 19/08/1964

The case of Ranjit D Udeshi vs State of Maharashtra (1964) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India that dealt with the issue of obscenity and its implications on freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Case Name: Ranjit D. Udeshi vs State of Maharashtra
• Criminal Appeal No.: 178 of 1962
• Equivalent citations: 1965 AIR 881, 1965 SCR (1) 65
• Petitioner: Ranjit D. Udeshi
• Respondent: State of Maharashtra
• Author: Hidayatullah
• Bench: Gajendragadkar, P.B. (Cj), Wanchoo, K.N., Hidayatullah, M., Shah, J.C., Ayyangar, N. Rajagopala
• Date of Judgment: 19/08/1964
• Acts Applied: Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 19(1)(a) and 19(2) Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860) section 292

Here’s everything you need to know about this significant case.

Facts of the Case

The appellant was one of the partners in a firm in Bombay that owned a book stall called Happy Book Stall.

The appellant and other partners were charged under section 292 of the Indian Penal Code for possessing and selling copies of an allegedly obscene book named “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” (unexpurgated edition).

The charges were framed based on the possession for sale of the book by the partners and the sale of the book to a customer by one of the accused individuals.

Issues Raised in the Case

1. Whether section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with obscenity, violates the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
2. Whether the book “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” is obscene within the scope of section 292.
3. Whether possession or sale punishable under section 292 of the IPC requires the intention to corrupt the public in general or the purchasers specifically.

Arguments by the Plaintiff (Appellant)

• Section 292 is vague and constitutes an impermissible restriction on the freedom of speech and expression.
• The book should not be considered obscene when viewed as a whole, considering its literary merit, context, and purpose.
• Obscenity should not be judged by the standards of an immature or abnormal person but by a normal individual.

Arguments by the Defendant (State of Maharashtra)

• Section 292 is valid and doesn’t infringe upon freedom of speech as it’s within the constitutional exception.
• The book “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” is obscene under section 292 of the IPC.
• Possession or sale doesn’t require the specific intent to corrupt but may be punishable based on a more generalised guilty intention.

Decision and Principles Laid Down

The Supreme Court held that section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with obscenity, is valid and doesn’t infringe upon the freedom of speech and expression.

The court determined that the book, “Lady Chatterley’s Lover,” in its entirety, passed the permissible limits of obscenity, considering community standards and social gain.

The judgment emphasised that obscenity is not entitled to constitutional protection and must yield to public decency and morality.

The ruling established that obscenity isn’t to be judged solely by isolated passages but by its overall effect and potential to deprave or corrupt individuals susceptible to its influence.

The court upheld the validity of section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, stating that it aimed to protect public decency and morality.

The judgment affirmed that obscenity was not constitutionally protected under freedom of speech and expression, as it fell outside the realm of protected speech.

It laid down the “Hicklin Test,” emphasising the potentiality of an object to deprave and corrupt individuals as a criterion for obscenity.

The court clarified that while treating sex and nudity in art or literature wasn’t necessarily obscene, obscenity lay in content that appealed to the carnal side of human nature and offended modesty and decency.

Lady Chatterley’s Lover, when assessed separately and as a whole, was deemed to cross the permissible limits of obscenity based on community standards without any significant social gain.

Conclusion

The High Court’s dismissal of the revision petition was upheld, and the Supreme Court consequently dismissed the appeal. The court ruled against the appellant, holding that the book in question fell within the scope of obscenity under section 292 of the Indian Penal Code.

“Lady Chatterley’s Lover” by DH Lawrence faced censorship and was banned in India in 1964.

Ranjit D Udeshi vs State of Maharashtra – Case Explained
Dinesh Verma

The expression “proceeds of crime” is the heart of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Accordingly, the definition of the expression “proceeds of crime” is set out under section 2(1)(u) of PMLA, 2002.

In this article, you will learn about the definition of “proceeds of crime” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which refers to any property obtained through criminal activities and how it is associated with money laundering.

What Is the Meaning of “Proceeds of Crime”?

The term “proceeds of crime” is defined as any property directly or indirectly acquired by an individual due to a criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. It includes the value of the property and any equivalent value held within the country if the original property is taken or held outside the country. It is important to note that “proceeds of crime” also encompass any property obtained due to criminal activity relating to the scheduled offence.

This definition is to be interpreted in conjunction with section 2(1)(v), which defines “property” as any property or assets, tangible or intangible, movable or immovable, corporeal or incorporeal, including deeds and instruments that show title or interest in such property or assets, regardless of location. Additionally, the explanation to section 2(1)(v) specifies that “property” can also include any property used in the commission of an offence under the PMLA or any of the scheduled offences.

Case Laws

Here are some important case laws that deal with the “proceeds of crime” under various legal contexts.

Rose Valley Real Estate and Constructions Ltd. vs Union of India (DB), 2015 Cri LJ 4850

A property’s value or any indirect benefits from illegal action that constitutes a “scheduled offence” are also included in the definition of proceeds of crime. Therefore, the amount directly collected from the public through the illegal debenture scheme would not only be considered a part of the proceeds of crime under the SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) Act but also any additional benefits or usufruct that have directly or indirectly accrued to the credit of the Company.

Mrs Nalini Chidambaram vs Directorate of Enforcement, 2018 (2) Madras LJ (Criminal) 430

It is only possible to determine the “Proceeds of Crime” after the investigation and the complaint have been filed.

Aman Krishanlal S S/o. Shri Krishan Lal S vs Assistant Director (Gujarat), 2015 (4) Crimes 295

The income would not fall within the proceeds of crime due to the applicant’s illegal actions, such as cricket betting.

J Sekar vs Union of India (DB), 2018 Cri LJ 1720

The phrase “value of any such property” refers to the worth of a property acquired through unlawful means, whether directly or indirectly. Although the actual property may no longer be accessible, its equivalent value, whether stored in cash or another asset, would still be available for attachment.

S Ramesh Pothy vs Adjudicating Authority (Madras), 2017 (1) CTC 408

The phrase “any property and any person” is used in this section. However, the section does not mention whether the relevant property must be in the hands of the alleged criminal at the period in question.

Indian Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager vs Govt. of India (Madras), 2012 (4) CTC 225

The elements of the phrase “proceeds of crime” are satisfied since:

• (i) The corporation is accused of committing planned offences, and
• (ii) The property in question is purportedly the product of criminal conduct connected to scheduled offences.

Moreover, it can be said that the property was the proceeds of a crime because the bank paid the full transaction consideration. Therefore, in prima facie, the property appears to be the proceeds of a crime, and it is up to the accused to prove otherwise before the criminal court.

C Chellamuthu vs Deputy Director, Prevention of Money Laundering Act (Madurai Bench), 2016 (1) Madras LJ (Criminal) 717

When “B” purchased a piece of property legitimately with a lawful selling consideration while unaware that the seller was facing criminal charges, the property no longer qualifies as “proceeds of crime.”

AK Samsuddin vs Union of India, 2016 (3) Kerala LT 874

Even though it is a requirement under the Act that a scheduled offence be committed before starting legal action, money laundering is a separate crime from those listed on the schedule. According to the Act’s structure, it solely addresses the money laundering of those who have obtained it via the commission of one of the scheduled offences.

B Rama Raju vs Union of India, (AP)(D.B.), 2011 (4) Andhra L D 383

The definition of “proceeds of crime” is not arbitrary and invalid because it includes property obtained, derived from, or in possession of a person who is not accused and is therefore unfair to innocent people. To further the Act’s overarching goals, the term “proceeds of crime” is defined broadly under the Act.

Conclusion

“Proceeds of crime” refers to any property or money obtained through criminal activity.

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in India has defined the term “proceeds of crime” as any property derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity. The Act has been enacted to combat money laundering and other financial crimes.

It is essential to identify and seize the proceeds of crime to disrupt the financial operations of criminal organizations and prevent the laundering of illegally obtained funds. Therefore, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 is a powerful legislative tool in the fight against money laundering and other financial crimes.

When analyzing the reach of the authority to attach such proceeds of crime, it is essential to keep in mind the broad definition of the term “proceeds of crime.”

What Is Proceeds of Crime Under PMLA (With Case Laws)
Dinesh Verma

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is a procedural law that regulates the administration of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), addressing issues arising from multiple legal systems in India.

Initially enacted in 1861, CrPC underwent revisions and a comprehensive replacement in 1973, introducing changes like anticipatory bail—subsequent amendments in 2005 incorporated provisions for plea bargaining and the rights of arrested individuals.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the CrPC over time, mandating FIR registration for cognizable offences, restricting arrests for punishments less than seven years, and emphasizing bail as an absolute right for bailable offences.

The criminal justice system grapples with challenges such as case backlogs and delays despite judicial interventions addressing concerns like custodial interrogations and speedy trials. A proposed replacement, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), aims to amend bail provisions, broaden property seizure scope, and modify the police system and Magistrates’ powers.

Transformative Legislation Introduced by Union Home Minister in 2023

Union Home Minister Amit Shah presented three crucial bills in Parliament on 11 August 2023, signalling a transformative overhaul of India’s criminal justice system. These bills, namely the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023; the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023; and the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023, aim to replace the antiquated British-era Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Indian Evidence Act, and Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

The proposed changes, meticulously crafted by the Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws under the Ministry of Home Affairs, target offences related to terrorism, crimes against women, corruption in elections, and acts against the state.

These bills were introduced during the last day of the monsoon session, designed to usher in a paradigm shift, ensuring expeditious justice, bolstering evidence integrity for higher conviction rates, and reducing case pendency. The bills were then forwarded to the Parliamentary Standing Committee for further deliberations, reflecting a thorough examination and scrutiny commitment.

Brief History of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSSB) to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

Let us now review the legislative journey from the introduction of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSSB) to its evolution into the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), noting key dates, stages, and the subsequent enactment details of the consolidated and amended law, which repeals the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Here are the three small tables presenting these facts:

Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSSB)

Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha (Second) Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSSB)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)

Act Details

Salient Features/ Key Changes/ Key Amendments in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)

Here are the salient features of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

New Framework

BNSS Sections vs CrPC Sections: BNSS introduces 531 sections, surpassing CrPC’s 484 sections.

Amendments and Additions:

• 107 sections amended, reflecting substantial changes.
• 9 new sections incorporated to address evolving legal needs.
• 9 sections were deleted for streamlining the legal framework.

Detention of Undertrials

• CrPC stipulates release on personal bond if half of the maximum imprisonment period is served, excluding death penalty cases.
• BNSS excludes this provision for offences punishable by life imprisonment and individuals facing proceedings in multiple offences.

Medical Examination

• CrPC permits medical examination in some instances, including rape, by a registered medical practitioner upon a sub-inspector’s request.
• BNSS allows any police officer to request such an examination.

Forensic Investigation

• BNSS mandates forensic investigation for offences with at least seven years of imprisonment.
• Forensic experts will collect evidence at crime scenes, documenting the process electronically. States without facilities can utilize those in other states.

Signatures and Finger Impressions

• CrPC empowers Magistrates to order specimen signatures or handwriting.
• BNSS expands this to include finger impressions and voice samples, which are applicable even if the person is not arrested.

Timelines for Procedures

• BNSS establishes timelines for various procedures, including the requirement for rape victim examination reports within seven days.
• Other specified timelines include delivering judgments within 30 days (extendable to 60 days), informing victims of investigation progress within 90 days, and framing charges by a sessions court within 60 days from the first hearing.

Hierarchy of Courts

• CrPC outlines a hierarchy of courts, including Magistrates, Sessions, High Courts, and the Supreme Court.
• BNSS retains the hierarchy but omits the provision allowing state governments to designate metropolitan areas with a population of over one million, which had Metropolitan Magistrates. It also omits the concept of the Assistant Session Judge.

Trial in Absentia

• BNSS allows trials in absentia for cases where the accused has absconded from India or cannot be procured.

e-Filing of FIR

• BNSS facilitates the electronic filing of FIRs, streamlining the initiation of legal proceedings.

Time-Bound Investigation and Judgment

• Emphasis on time-bound processes, from filing FIR to delivering judgments, reducing delays in the justice system.

Trial on Video Conference

• Video conferencing was introduced for legal proceedings, enhancing accessibility and efficiency.

Police Custody

• BNSS introduces changes in the criteria and regulations for police custody, addressing concerns and ensuring fairness.

Video Recording of Search and Seizure

• Police actions, such as search and seizure, are to be video-recorded for transparency and accountability.

Electronic Recording of Depositions

• Depositions of accused and witnesses are recorded electronically, ensuring accurate documentation.

Service of Process in Electronic Form

• Legal notifications and processes to be served electronically, aligning with modern practices.

e-FIR (to be signed within three days)

• Introduction of Electronic FIRs signed promptly within three days for efficient record-keeping.

Sanction of Government for Trial

• Government sanction is required for the trial to be given within 120 days, streamlining administrative processes.

Magistrate’s Authority for Samples

• The magistrate was empowered to order the collection of handwriting, fingerprints, etc., for investigative purposes.

Victim or Informant Notification

• Police are mandated to inform the victim or informant about the case’s progress.

Summary Trial Scope Expansion

• Increase the scope of summary trials to offences punishable with imprisonment up to 3 years, reducing the workload of session courts.

 Zero FIR – Specific Provision

• Implementation of a specific provision for “Zero FIR,” allowing FIR lodgement in any police station, with a duty to transfer it to the relevant station within 15 days.

 Use of Handcuffs

• Authorization for police officers to use handcuffs in specific cases, including habitual offenders, escapees, organized crimes, murder, rape, human trafficking, offences against children, and offences against the state.

Conclusion

The evolution from the CrPC to the BNSS signifies a significant paradigm shift in India’s criminal justice system. The legislative amendments, meticulously crafted by the Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws, reflect a commitment to expeditious justice, evidence integrity, and the reduction of case pendency.

The BNSS introduces a new framework with 531 sections, surpassing the CrPC, and brings forth substantial amendments, additions, and deletions to streamline the legal landscape. Crucial alterations in undertrial detention, medical examinations, forensic investigations, and the hierarchy of courts mark a progressive approach to addressing contemporary challenges. Integrating technology, such as video conferencing and e-filing of FIRs, underscores the legislative intent to enhance efficiency and transparency.

Moreover, the proposed changes in police custody criteria, video recording of search and seizure, electronic recording of depositions, and the introduction of specific provisions like “Zero FIR” demonstrate a commitment to modernizing and aligning the legal system with evolving societal needs. The expansion of summary trial scope and regulations on the use of handcuffs further contribute to the comprehensive nature of the BNSS.

As the BNSS progresses through the legislative stages, including the examination by the Parliamentary Standing Committee, its potential impact on the criminal justice system remains a focal point for legal scholars, practitioners, and the public. The enactment of this legislation promises a redefined legal landscape, striving to address contemporary challenges while upholding the principles of justice and fairness.

Related:

• Overview of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
• Overview of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Overview of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Dinesh Verma

In 1834, the inaugural Indian Law Commission, led by Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay, was formed to assess and propose reforms to the legal system, culminating in the enactment of the Indian Penal Code in 1860.

In light of contemporary needs, the Indian government now seeks to revamp criminal laws, prioritising citizen-centricity and efficient legal procedures.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaced the Indian Penal Code, 1860, emphasising community service for minor offences and addressing crimes against women, children, murder, and offences against the state. Notably, the legislation introduces gender-neutral provisions, stringent penalties for organised crime and terrorism, and new offences related to secession and activities endangering India’s sovereignty and unity. Additionally, fines and punishments for various offences are proposed to be increased.

Transformative Legislation Introduced by Union Home Minister

Union Home Minister Amit Shah presented three crucial bills in Parliament on 11 August 2023, signalling a transformative overhaul of India’s criminal justice system.

These bills, namely the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023; the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023; and the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023, aim to replace the antiquated British-era Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Indian Evidence Act, and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

The proposed changes, meticulously crafted by the Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws under the Ministry of Home Affairs, target offences related to terrorism, crimes against women, corruption in elections, and acts against the state.

These bills were introduced during the last day of the monsoon session, designed to usher in a paradigm shift, ensuring expeditious justice, bolstering evidence integrity for higher conviction rates, and reducing case pendency. The bills were then forwarded to the Parliamentary Standing Committee for further deliberations, reflecting a thorough examination and scrutiny commitment.

Brief History of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSB) to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

You will now read about the legislative journey from the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSB) to its evolution into the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), noting key dates, stages, and the subsequent enactment details of the consolidated and amended law, which repeals the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Here are the three small tables presenting these facts.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSB)

The Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BSNB)

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

Act Details

Structure of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

• Total Sections: 358
• Total Chapters: 20

Chapters:

• Chapter 1 – Preliminary (Sections 1 to 3)
• Chapter 2 – Punishments (Sections 4 to 13)
• Chapter 3 – General Exceptions (Sections 14 to 44)
• Chapter 4 – Abetment, Criminal Conspiracy and Attempt (Sections 45 to 62)
• Chapter 5 – Offences Against Woman and Child (Sections 63 to 99)
• Chapter 6 – Offences Affecting the Human Body (Sections 100 to 146)
• Chapter 7 – Offences Against the State (Sections 147 to 158)
• Chapter 8 – Offences Relating to the Army, Navy and Air Force (Sections 159 to 168)
• Chapter 9 – Offences Relating to Elections (Sections 169 to 177)
• Chapter 10 – Offences Relating to Coin, Currency-Notes, Bank-Notes, and Government Stamps (Sections 178 to 188)
• Chapter 11 – Offences Against the Public Tranquillity (Sections 189 to 197)
• Chapter 12 – Offences by or Relating to Public Servants (Sections 198 to 205)
• Chapter 13 – Contempts of the Lawful Authority of Public Servants (Sections 206 to 226)
• Chapter 14 – False Evidence and Offences Against Public Justice (Sections 227 to 269)
• Chapter 15 – Offences Affecting the Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency and Morals (Sections 270 to 297)
• Chapter 16 – Offences Relating to Religion (Sections 298 to 302)
• Chapter 17 – Offences Against Property (Sections 303 to 334)
• Chapter 18 – Offences Relating to Documents and to Property Marks (Section 335 to 350)
• Chapter 19 – Criminal Intimidation, Insult, Annoyance, Defamation, etc. (Section 351 to 357)
• Chapter 20 – Repeal and Savings (Section 358)

Salient Features/ Key Changes/ Key Amendments in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

You will now read about the critical changes in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), including a significant reduction in sections, updates, additions, and deletions, as well as noteworthy modifications in offences against the body, sexual offences against women, sedition, terrorism, organised crime, mob lynching, and alignment with Supreme Court rulings.

Here are the salient features of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

Reduced Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) comprise 358 sections, marking a notable reduction from the old Indian Penal Code (IPC), which contained 511 sections.

Section Updates

A substantial overhaul is witnessed in the BNS, with 175 sections undergoing updates to align with contemporary legal considerations and societal needs.

New Sections Introduced

The BNS incorporates eight new sections, addressing emerging legal dimensions and challenges, reflecting the evolving nature of offences in the contemporary context.

Section Deletions

In a streamlined approach, the BNS discards 22 sections from its predecessor, possibly to eliminate redundancy or to adapt to the changing legal landscape. This deletion signifies a focused effort to refine and simplify the legal framework.

Offences Against the Body

The Indian Penal Code addresses acts like murder, suicide abetment, assault, and grievous hurt, all retained in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Additionally, the BNS introduces new offences, encompassing organised crime, terrorism, and group-based murder or grievous hurt on specific grounds.

Sexual Offenses Against Women

The IPC criminalises rape, voyeurism, stalking, and insulting a woman’s modesty, provisions upheld in the BNS. Notably, the BNS criminalises sexual intercourse with a woman through deceitful means or false promises.

Sedition

The BNS eliminates the offence of sedition, replacing it with penalties for

• exciting or attempting to excite secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities,
• encouraging separatist activities, or
• endangering India’s sovereignty or unity.

These offences may involve various means, including words, signs, electronic communication, or financial transactions.

Terrorism

Defined in the BNS as acts intending to threaten the country’s unity, integrity, and security or intimidate the public, terrorism attracts severe penalties. Attempting or committing terrorism may result in death, life imprisonment, or a fine of Rs 10 lakh, or imprisonment between five years and life, with a minimum fine of five lakh rupees.

Organized Crime

Covering offences like kidnapping, extortion, contract killing, land grabbing, financial scams, and cybercrime on behalf of a crime syndicate, organised crime under the BNS is punishable by death, life imprisonment, or a fine of Rs 10 lakh in case of death. Alternatively, imprisonment between five years and life, with a minimum fine of five lakh rupees, is prescribed.

Mob Lynching

The BNS introduces murder or grievous hurt by five or more people on specified grounds, such as race, caste, sex, language, or personal belief, as an offence. The prescribed punishment for such murder includes a minimum of seven years imprisonment to life imprisonment or the death penalty.

Supreme Court Rulings

The BNS aligns with certain Supreme Court decisions, notably omitting adultery as an offence and introducing life imprisonment, alongside the death penalty, for murder or attempted murder by a life convict.

Criticism

While the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, reflects a commendable effort to modernise the Indian Penal Code of 1860 and adapt it to contemporary needs, a few aspects warrant critical consideration.

Rapid Legislative Process

The introduction, passage, and enactment of the legislation within a short timeframe may raise concerns about the thoroughness of the deliberative process. This significant overhaul requires comprehensive scrutiny and stakeholder input to ensure well-informed decisions.

Lack of Public Consultation

The absence of extensive public consultations or open discussions on the proposed changes raises questions about the inclusivity of the legislative process. Public input is crucial for laws that profoundly impact society and justice systems.

Paradigm Shift Impact

The ambitious goal of bringing about a paradigm shift in the justice system, though laudable, necessitates careful implementation and monitoring to gauge its impact on expeditious justice, evidence integrity, and case pendency.

Conclusion

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, represents a significant and transformative step in the evolution of India’s criminal justice system, aiming to address contemporary needs and streamline legal procedures. The legislative journey from the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNSB) to its enactment as the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) reflects a comprehensive effort to modernise and consolidate criminal laws.

The legislation, introduced by Union Home Minister Amit Shah, encompasses critical changes such as a reduced number of sections, updates, additions, and deletions, with a focus on addressing offences against the body, sexual offences against women, sedition, terrorism, organised crime, mob lynching, and alignment with Supreme Court rulings.

However, it is crucial to critically examine certain aspects of the legislative process, such as the rapid pace of development and the limited scope of public consultation. While commendable, the transformative nature of the changes should be implemented with caution to ensure effective results. The goal of expeditious justice, evidence integrity, and reduction of case pendency is ambitious and requires careful monitoring and evaluation.

In essence, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 marks a significant milestone in the ongoing efforts to reform India’s legal framework, and its success will depend on diligent implementation, continuous evaluation, and responsiveness to the evolving needs of society.

Related:

• Overview of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
• Overview of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Overview of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Dinesh Verma

Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt Ltd. vs State Of Haryana & Anr
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 13917 of 2009
Date of Judgment: 11 October 2011

• Court Name: Supreme Court of India
• Case Name: Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt Ltd. vs State Of Haryana & Anr
• Case no.: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 13917 of 2009
• Petitioner: Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt Ltd.
• Respondents: State Of Haryana & Anr
• Author: R V Raveendran
• Bench: R.V. Raveendran, A.K. Patnaik, H.L. Gokhale
• Date of Judgment: 11 October 2011
• Acts Applied: The Registration Act of 1908

The case of Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Haryana & Anr. was heard by the Supreme Court of India. Justice R. V. Raveendran delivered the judgment on October 11, 2011. The case dealt with the issue of General Power of Attorney Sales (GPA Sales) or Sale Agreement/General Power of Attorney/Will transfers (SA/GPA/WILL transfers), which were used to avoid legal and financial requirements related to property transfers.

Facts

The case involved the practice of SA/GPA/WILL transfers, where instead of executing a deed of conveyance, the parties would enter into agreements of sale, the general power of attorney, or will transfers. These transactions were primarily used to avoid payment of stamp duty, registration charges, and capital gains tax and to invest black money. The petitioner, Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd., challenged the validity and legality of such transactions.

Issues

1. Whether SA/GPA/WILL transfers are legally valid and enforceable.
2. Whether SA/GPA/WILL transfers lead to adverse consequences such as the generation of black money, growth of land mafia, and criminalization of real estate transactions.
3. Whether measures taken by the states and the Union of India to discourage SA/GPA/WILL transfers are sufficient.

Arguments

The petitioner argued that SA/GPA/WILL transfers were illegal and should be declared void as they were used to evade legal requirements and generate black money. They contended that these transactions adversely affected the economy, civil society, and law and order.

The respondents, including Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh, agreed that SA/GPA/WILL transfers should be curbed as they led to revenue loss and increased litigations due to defective titles. They highlighted the measures taken to address the issue, such as amending the Registration Act and stamp laws to require registration and payment of stamp duty for SA/GPA/WILL transfers.

Judgment

The Supreme Court held that SA/GPA/WILL transfers were not legally valid and should be discouraged. The court observed that these transactions were used to avoid legal requirements and generate black money. They adversely affected the economy, civil society, and law and order. The court noted that although some measures had been taken by the states and the Union of India to address the issue, they were insufficient.

Principles Laid Down in the Case

1. SA/GPA/WILL transfers are not legally valid and enforceable.
2. SA/GPA/WILL transfers are used to evade legal requirements, generate black money, and facilitate the growth of the land mafia.
3. Measures taken by the states and the Union of India to discourage SA/GPA/WILL transfers, such as amending stamp and registration laws, are inadequate.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court concluded that SA/GPA/WILL transfers were illegitimate and should be discouraged. The court highlighted the adverse consequences of these transactions and emphasized the need for more effective measures to curb them. The judgment aimed to prevent the generation of black money, protect the interests of buyers, and ensure the proper transfer of property in accordance with legal requirements.

Suraj Lamp & Industries vs State of Haryana – Case Explained
Dinesh Verma

A Notice under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (1881) is a formal communication sent to a person or entity who has issued a dishonoured or bounced cheque due to insufficient funds in their bank account or other reasons.

Section 138 of the Indian Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 provides a legal remedy to the payee (the person to whom the check is payable) to recover the amount mentioned in the dishonoured cheque along with additional penalties.

The notice serves as a precursor to legal action and must be issued within a specified timeframe after the check has been dishonoured. This notice informs the drawer (the person who wrote the cheque) about the dishonour of the cheque and provides them with an opportunity to make the payment within 15 days from the receipt of the notice to avoid legal consequences.

Related: What Is Cheque Bouncing, Its Reasons and Punishment?

Model Draft of Notice U/S 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act

To,

XYZ,
S/o Sh ABC,
Address———————-

Subject: NOTICE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT READ WITH SECTION 420 IPC.

Under the instructions of my client Sh MN, S/o Sh OP, R/o House No. ——-, I hereby serve you the following legal notice:-

1. That you approached my client for a friendly loan of Rs 7,00,000\- in the month of March 2022.
2. That my client advanced you the friendly loan as you have been known to my client for some time.
3. That in the discharge of your liability, you gave a cheque bearing no. ———— dated 31 July 2022.
4. That my client presented the cheque given by you on the month of 5 August 2022, but the same was not honoured. My client informed you about the dishonour of the cheque, and you requested my client to present the same after three months. My client acted upon your assurances and presented the cheque to his bank, but the same was dishonoured and was returned by the bank vide memo dated 8 November 2022 with the remarks “Insufficient funds”.
5. That cheque was handed over to my client by you in the discharge of your liability, but you have failed in your duty to see that the aforesaid cheque gets encashed.
6. That dishonouring the above-said cheque entitles my client to prosecute you criminally and recover the amount in civil proceedings.
7. That you are aware that under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a drawee has to serve a notice of 30 days to the drawer (i.e. to you) to make the payment of the dishonoured cheques, and in case the drawer fails to make the payment within 15 days from the receipt of the notice, the offence is committed by the drawer.

I, therefore, on behalf of my client, call upon you to make the payment of the above-said cheque amounting to Rs 7,00,000\- within 15 days from the receipt of this legal notice; otherwise, my client will prosecute you criminally and recover the amount in civil proceedings.

Note: A copy of the notice has been retained in my office for record and further action.

Dated: 5 December 2022
(————)
EFG (name of the advocate)
Advocate

What Is Model Draft of Notice Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act?
Dinesh Verma

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, is a legislative measure enacted by the Indian Parliament to safeguard the rights of Muslim women who have undergone divorce or obtained a divorce from their husbands.

This law applies to Muslim women who were married under Muslim law, and it outlines their entitlements following divorce. It addresses issues related to maintenance, the payment of Mahr or Dower, and the distribution of properties given to the woman before or during marriage. The Act empowers Magistrates to adjudicate matters of maintenance, mahr, and property distribution, ensuring that divorced Muslim women receive fair and reasonable provisions.

Additionally, the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act offers an option for divorced women and their former husbands to be governed by the provisions of sections 125 to 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if they jointly or separately declare their preference in writing.

The Act also grants the Central Government the authority to create rules for its effective implementation, covering various procedural aspects. It includes transitional provisions for pending applications under the Code of Criminal Procedure, ensuring a smooth transition to the new legal framework.

Overall, the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act aims to provide legal protection and support to Muslim women who have been divorced, addressing their financial rights and ensuring a fair and just resolution of related matters.

In this article, we deal with notable cases related to various sections of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986, providing insights into legal judgments and interpretations of the provisions of the Act. These cases cover key aspects of the Act, including maintenance, entitlements, constitutional challenges, and its impact on other legal provisions. Below is a summary of the cases and the sections of the Act they pertain to.

Section 3

These are some notable cases related to section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986.

All India Muslim Advocates Forum vs Osman Khan, 1990 (1) ALT 360

The maintenance provision covers only the “Iddat” period. The husband is no longer obligated to pay maintenance after Iddat.

Ali vs Sufaira, 1988 (2) KLT 94

A divorced woman is not entitled to maintenance but is entitled to a fair and reasonable financial supply from her ex-husband during the Iddat period.

Anowaruddin Ahmed vs State, 1989 CrLJ NOC 20 (Cal)

The husband’s application under section 127 of the CrPC to change any information in his wife’s application is unmaintainable.

Abdul Mannan vs Saira Khatoon and Others, 2000 (4) Crimes 438 Pat. (DB)

A divorced woman is no longer eligible to make a support claim under section 125 of the CrPC as of the effective date of this Act (Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986).

Danial Latifi vs UOI, II (2001) DMC (SC) 714

Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Indian Constitution are not violated by the provisions of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986.

Nizar vs Hyrunneessa, I (2000) DMC (Ker) 229

The Magistrate’s order will not be invalidated or unsupportable just because the Magistrate neglected to note the causes for the delay in deciding the application.

Sirazuddin Ahmed Saheb Bagwan vs Smt. Khatija Sirajuddin and Others, II (1996) DMC (BOM) 449

If a court has previously issued a judgement or order providing wife maintenance, section 3 of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act does not apply.

Section 4

Here are some important cases related to section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act.

Sakina vs Salim Khan, I (1998) DMC (HP) 684

After the divorce, the wife is only entitled to maintenance for the duration of Iddat and not any longer. Her claim for maintenance under section 125 of CrPC is also deemed unmaintainable in light of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act’s provisions.

Syed Fazal Pookoya Thangal vs UOI, II (1993) DMC (Ker) 285

The contention that section 4(2) of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986, contravenes Article 25 and Article 26 of the Indian Constitution is unsubstantiated. This is because section 4(2) does not amount to an abuse of legislative authority, as alleged. Furthermore, it has been established that only the resources of the Wakf Board, and not those of the Wakfs, are utilized for the maintenance payments mandated by section 4(2).

Section 5

Here are a couple of landmark cases related to section 5 of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act.

Bishnu Charan Mohanty vs UOI through Secretary, II (1993) DMC (ORI.) 451

Hindus lack a personal law governing the support paid to their divorced wives. When this portion was read, there was no bias in favour of a Muslim husband, and the classification is valid. Therefore, the argument that section 5 of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act violates Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution cannot be upheld.

Rashida Khanum vs SK Salim 1996 AIHC (Ori)

The husband’s responsibility is capped at the Iddat period once the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act has taken effect. Section 125 of the CrPC would only be applicable if both parties chose to be governed by it at the initial hearing under section 3(2) and in no other circumstance.

Section 7

Here are three important cases related to section 7 of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act.

Sakinabai vs Fakruddin, II (1999) DMC (MP) 576

When the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act of 1986 went into effect, any pending applications under section 125 CrPC had to be resolved by the Magistrate in accordance with this Act’s (Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act) rules.

Anowaruddin Ahmed vs State, 1989 CrLJ NOC 20 (Cal)

In accordance with section 7 of the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, a divorced woman, not her husband, may apply. The husband cannot maintain his request for a modification under section 127 CrPC.

Usman Khan Bahamani vs Fathimunnisa Begum, 1990 CrLJ 1364 (AP)

After the 1986 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act went into effect, the provisions of sections 125 and 127 of the Criminal Procedure Code no longer apply.

Cases Related to Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act
Dinesh Verma

Abbreviations related to case laws play a crucial role in legal research and citation, providing a concise and standardized way to reference specific court decisions, legal publications, and terms. These abbreviations are widely used in legal documents, court opinions, and scholarly articles to streamline references and maintain clarity.

Understanding these abbreviations is essential for legal professionals, scholars, and anyone involved in legal research.

In this law article, you will learn about the most important legal abbreviations that are commonly used in case laws.

• AC: Appeal Cases
• AD (Cr): Apex Decisions (Criminal)
• AER: All England Law Reports
• AIHC: All India High Court Cases
• AIR: All India Reporter
• AIRSCW: All India Reporter Supreme Court Weekly
• AJIL: American Journal of International Law
• All. LJ: Allahabad Law Journal
• ALR: Allahabad Law Reports
• ALT: Andhra Law Times
• APLJ: Andhra Pradesh Law Journal
• BCR: Bombay Cases Reporter
• Ben. LR: Bengal Law Reporter
• Bom. LR: Bombay Law Reports
• CCR: Crown Cases Reserved
• Chand. LR: Chandigarh Law Reporter
• CCC: Chandigarh Criminal Cases
• Ch D: Law Reports Chancery Division
• CrLJ: Criminal Law Journal
• CLR: Criminal Law Reporter
• Cri. LT: Criminal Law Times
• CLT: Cuttack Law Times
• CrPC: Code of Criminal Procedure
• CWN: Calcutta Weekly Notes
• DC: Drugs Cases
• DL: Delhi Lawyer
• DLT: Delhi Law Times
• DRJ: Delhi Reported Judgements
• East Cr.: C Eastern Criminal Cases
• ECC: Excise and Customs Cases
• EFR: Excise and Food Adulteration Cases
• ELT: Excise Law Times
• FAC: Food Adulteration Cases
• Guj CD: Gujarat Current Decisions
• Guj. LH: Gujarat Law Herald
• GJR: Gujarat Law Reporter
• HLJ: Himachal Law Journal
• IA: Law Reports Indian Appeals (Privy Council)
• IC: Indian Cases
• ILR: Indian Law Reports
• ITR: Income Tax Reporter
• JCC: Journal of Criminal Cases
• JLJ: Jabalpur Law Journal
• JT: Judgment Today
• KBD: Law Reports (English) King’s Bench Division
• Ker. LJ: Kerala Law Journal
• KLT: Kerala Law Times
• Mad. LW: Madras Law Weekly
• MHLJ: Maharashtra Law Journal
• MIA: Moore’s Indian Appeals
• MLJ: Madras Law Journal
• MPLJ: Madhya Pradesh Law Journal
• MWN: Madras Weekly Notes
• NZLR: New Zealand Law Reports
• OCR: Orissa Criminal Reports
• PUR: Patna Law Journal Reports
• QBD: Law Reports (English) Queens Bench Division
• RCJ: All India Rent Control Journal
• RCC: Rajasthan Criminal Cases
• Rec. CR: Recent Criminal Reports
• RLR: Rajdhani Law Times
• RLW: Rajasthan Law Weekly
• SCALE: Supreme Court Almanac
• SCC: Supreme Court Cases
• SCC (Civ): Supreme Court Cases (Civil)
• SCC (Cri): Supreme Court Cases (Criminal)
• SCC (L&S): Supreme Court Cases (Labour & Services)
• Sim. LC: Shimla Law Cases
• SLJ: Shimla Law Journal
• SCR: Supreme Court Reports
• SCJ: Supreme Court Journal
• UJ: Unreported Judgments
• WLR: Weekly Law Reports
• WR: Weekly Reporter
• WLN: Weekly Law Notes

As legal professionals navigate the vast landscape of case law, familiarity with these abbreviations is essential for effective communication, precise citation, and efficient legal research.

Do you have some abbreviations that are missing from this list? Please reach us on WhatsApp or other social media, and we will update this list with your suggestions.

Read Next: Important Terms of the Indian Parliamentary System

Important Legal Abbreviations Related to Case Laws
Dinesh Verma

This law note provides an overview of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, a transformative legislation introduced in 2023 to amend the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. It outlines key provisions, salient features, and notable changes, as well as highlighting criticisms and the need for careful implementation. The legislative initiative is presented as a landmark step toward aligning the Indian legal system with contemporary needs and technological advancements.

Introduction

The Indian Evidence Act of 1872, enacted to consolidate laws related to evidence for court proceedings, has been a foundational element in the Indian legal system. However, the evolving landscape of Indian democracy, marked by seven decades of experience, necessitates a thorough reevaluation of criminal laws, including the Indian Evidence Act, aligning them with contemporary needs and societal aspirations.

Recognizing the inadequacies of the existing law to address technological advancements, the proposed legislation, “Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,” introduces significant amendments.

Noteworthy provisions include:

• Incorporating electronically given information in the definition of evidence.
• Granting electronic or digital records the same legal standing as paper records.
• Expanding the scope of secondary evidence to accommodate modern processes.
• Imposing limits on admissible facts with precise and uniform rules for court practices.

This legislative initiative reflects a forward-looking approach to ensure the efficacy and relevance of evidence laws in the digital age.

Transformative Legislation Introduced by Union Home Minister Amit Shah in 2023

Union Home Minister Amit Shah presented three crucial bills in Parliament on August 11, 2023, signalling a transformative overhaul of India’s criminal justice system. These bills, namely the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023; the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023; and the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023, aim to replace the antiquated British-era Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and the Indian Evidence Act.

The proposed changes, meticulously crafted by the Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws under the Ministry of Home Affairs, target offences related to terrorism, crimes against women, corruption in elections, and acts against the state.

These bills were introduced during the last day of the monsoon session, designed to usher in a paradigm shift, ensuring expeditious justice, bolstering evidence integrity for higher conviction rates, and reducing case pendency. The bills were then forwarded to the Parliamentary Standing Committee for further deliberations, reflecting a commitment to thorough examination and scrutiny.

Brief History of the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 (BSB) to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA)

The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 (BSB) underwent a legislative process, starting with its introduction in August 2023, withdrawal in December 2023, and subsequent replacement by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which was passed in both houses and received presidential assent on December 25, 2023, aiming to consolidate rules and principles of evidence for fair trial, thereby repealing the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Here are three small tables presenting these facts.

The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 (BSB)

The Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill, 2023

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Structure of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Total Sections: 170

Total Parts: 4

• Part 1: Preliminary (Sections 1 to 2)
• Part 2: Relevancy (Sections 3 to 50)
• Part 3: On Proof (Sections 51 to 103)
• Part 4: Production and Effect of Evidence (Sections 104 to 170)

Total Chapters: 12

• Chapter 1: Preliminary (Sections 1 to 2)
• Chapter 2: Relevancy of Facts (Sections 3 to 50)
• Chapter 3: Facts Which Need Not Be Proved (Sections 51 to 53)
• Chapter 4: Oral Evidence (Sections 54 to 55)
• Chapter 5: Documentary Evidence (Sections 56 to 93)
• Chapter 6: Exclusion of Oral Evidence By Documentary Evidence (Sections 94 to 103)
• Chapter 7: Burden of Proof (Sections 104 to 120)
• Chapter 8: Estoppel (Sections 121 to 123)
• Chapter 9: Witnesses (Sections 124 to 139)
• Chapter 10: Examination of Witnesses (Sections 140 to 168)
• Chapter 11: Improper Admission and Rejection of Evidence (Section 169)
• Chapter 12: Repeal and Savings (Section 170)

Total Schedule: 1

Salient Features / Key Changes / Key Amendments in Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

The new Act introduces significant amendments, including updates to existing sections and marking a comprehensive overhaul of evidence rules in alignment with contemporary legal requirements. Here are the salient features of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:

1. Section Count Increase

The new legislation will comprise 170 sections, marking an increase from the previous 167 sections of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

2. Section Updates

Notably, 23 sections from the existing law (The Indian Evidence Act, 1872) will undergo updates, reflecting a comprehensive revision to align with contemporary legal needs.

3. Addition of New Section

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adniniyam introduces a new section, emphasizing the dynamic nature of the legal framework and the need for specificity in certain areas.

4. Section Deletions

Five sections have been removed from the old law (The Indian Evidence Act, 1872), streamlining the legal content and potentially eliminating obsolete or redundant provisions.

5. Removal of Specific Terms

The new law omits certain terms such as “Her Majesty Queen,” “Parliament of UK,” “London Gazette,” “Commonwealth,” “Court of Justice in England,” and “British Crown,” signalling a departure from references that may no longer be relevant.

6. Documentary Evidence

Under the Indian Evidence Act (IEA), documents include writing, maps, and caricatures. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) expands this definition to include electronic records. Documentary evidence is classified into primary and secondary evidence, where primary evidence involves original documents, including electronic records and video recordings. Secondary evidence encompasses documents and oral accounts proving the contents of the original, a classification retained by the BSA.

7. Oral Evidence

While the Indian Evidence Act confines oral evidence to statements made before courts, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam of 2023 introduces the possibility of giving oral evidence electronically. This innovation allows witnesses, accused persons, and victims to testify electronically.

8. Admissibility of Electronic or Digital Records

Documentary evidence, according to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, now includes information in electronic records stored in various media, expanding to semiconductor memory and communication devices like smartphones and laptops. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam asserts that electronic or digital records will hold the same legal weight as paper records, encompassing emails, server logs, locational evidence, and voice mails.

9. Expansion of Secondary Evidence

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam broadens secondary evidence to include oral and written admissions and testimony from a person skilled in document examination. Additionally, it specifies that secondary evidence may be required not only when the original is inaccessible or destroyed but also when the genuineness of the document is in question.

10. Joint Trials

Addressing joint trials, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam clarifies the treatment of a trial involving multiple persons when an accused has absconded or not responded to an arrest warrant. It explains that such a situation will be considered a joint trial, clarifying the Indian Evidence Act’s provisions on confessions affecting multiple accused parties.

Criticism

While the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, reflects a commendable effort to modernize the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 and adapt it to contemporary needs, a few aspects warrant critical consideration. Here are four such examples.

1. Rapid Legislative Process

The introduction, passage, and enactment of the legislation within a short timeframe may raise concerns about the thoroughness of the deliberative process. This significant overhaul requires comprehensive scrutiny and stakeholder input to ensure well-informed decisions.

2. Lack of Public Consultation

The absence of extensive public consultations or open discussions on the proposed changes raises questions about the inclusivity of the legislative process. Public input is crucial for laws that profoundly impact society and justice systems.

3. Rapid Technological Integration

While acknowledging the need to incorporate electronic evidence, the pace of technological integration in legal proceedings should be managed cautiously to avoid potential challenges related to access, security, and understanding for all stakeholders.

4. Paradigm Shift Impact

The ambitious goal of bringing about a paradigm shift in the justice system, though laudable, necessitates careful implementation and monitoring to gauge its impact on expeditious justice, evidence integrity, and case pendency.

Conclusion

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, emerges as a landmark legislation, steering the Indian legal system into the digital age with comprehensive amendments to the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.

The new Act, enacted on December 25, 2023, not only increases section count but also signifies a meticulous process of updates, deletions, and additions, aiming to align the legal framework with contemporary needs.

The removal of specific terms and the embrace of electronic evidence underscore the legislature’s recognition of technological advancements.

Salient features, such as expanding secondary evidence and clarifications on joint trials, reflect a commitment to precision and fairness in legal proceedings. This legislative initiative encapsulates a forward-looking approach, emphasizing the adaptability of the legal system to societal and technological transformations for a fair and effective administration of justice.

Related:

• Overview of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
• Overview of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Overview of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Dinesh Verma