New Delhi: With Monday’s passage of two Bills—the West Bengal Public Safety and Control of Anti-Social Activities Bill and the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Bill—in the West Bengal Assembly, the BJP government in the state has doubled down on public safety, peace and order, and a more robust framework for the ‘effective prevention and control of anti-social activities’.
The Bills have now officially proceeded for Governor R. N. Ravi’s assent before they become laws.
The first Bill notes that existing laws have been found ‘ineffective and inadequate’ to combat certain ‘nefarious activities’ that threaten the lives and property of citizens, and the government asserts that this new legal framework is necessary to curb conspiratorial designs and severely punish anti-social elements to ensure the safety of the ‘bona fide citizens of the state’.
Defining ‘anti-social activities’ as any act likely to cause alarm, fear, or insecurity among the public, or any act that poses a grave danger to life and property, the government has sought a broad definition for what constitutes a threat to public safety. It specifically includes illegal activities like unauthorised mining, sand extraction, and the obstruction of lawful business or trade.
Central to this Bill is the definition of a ‘goonda’—which refers to individuals who habitually commit or abet anti-social activities, either alone or as part of a gang. It also includes those chargesheeted for organised crime under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (Sections 111 or 112) or those with records under the Arms Act, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and the Explosive Substances Act.
New powers
A major feature of the Bill is the power of preventive detention. The state government, or authorised District Magistrates and Police Commissioners, can order the detention of a ‘goonda’ if satisfied that it is necessary to prevent them from engaging in anti-social activities. Such an order can remain in force for up to 12 months from the date of detention, provided it is confirmed by an advisory board; if a District Magistrate or Police Commissioner issues the order, it must be approved by the state government within 15 days.
Additionally, the Bill introduces ‘externment’ orders: where authorities can direct a person to remove themselves from a specific area for a period not exceeding one year if they are believed to be engaged in or about to engage in anti-social activities.
The Bill proposes several specific punishments for non-compliance and related offences. For absconding—if a person evades a detention order and fails to appear after a public notification—they face imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Breaching an ‘externment’—for anyone who contravenes an order to stay out of a specific area—can be punished with imprisonment for up to three years and a fine.
Harbouring offenders—knowing or believing that a person is subject to a detention or externment order and choosing to harbour or conceal them— has been made punishable by up to two years of imprisonment and a fine. In fact, the police are empowered to enter and search any place and seize any property believed to be used for anti-social activities.
Under this Act, every offence and every wilful contravention of a lawful order is classified as cognisable (police to arrest an accused without a warrant and start an investigation without court permission) and non-bailable (where bail is not an automatic right; the court decides whether to grant it based on the specific case).
To prevent misuse, the Bill mandates the constitution of an advisory board. This board must consist of a chairperson who is or has been a high court judge, and two other members qualified for such a position. Within three weeks of any detention, the government must place the grounds of the order and any representation made by the detained person before this board. If the board finds ‘no sufficient cause’ for detention, the person must be released immediately.
Public order
The second Bill is the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Bill, 2026. Significantly amending its existing 1972 Act, the West Bengal government’s primary objective for this Bill is to tackle acts of arson, vandalism and property damage carried out by ‘anti-social elements’ intent on destabilising the state’s peaceful environment. It also seeks to ensure that the ones responsible for ‘destroying’ property during public disturbances are held financially accountable.
Notably, the bill broadens the scope of protection to include both public and private property, ensuring that individual citizens can also seek redress for losses sustained during riots or unlawful assemblies.
To facilitate the recovery of losses, the bill proposes the creation of one or more claims commissions, tasked with adjudicating claims for compensation in specific areas as designated by the state government.
As per the Bill, each commission will be headed by a chairperson who has served as a District Judge. It can appoint a claims commissioner (not below the rank of Additional District Magistrate) and expert assessors to investigate the liability of those involved and estimate the financial value of the damage.
The commission will hold the powers of a civil court, allowing it to take evidence on oath, enforce the attendance of witnesses, and compel the production of documents.
A key feature of the proposed law is the application of the principle of strict liability once a nexus is established between a public incident and the resulting property damage. The bill ensures that liability is not just limited to actual perpetrators but extends to those who instigated, incited, abetted, organized, sponsored, or harboured the perpetrators.
Penalties and no appeals
The financial consequences for offenders are severe. Liability includes the cost of the damage to property and the costs incurred by authorities in taking preventive or remedial measures. Simple interest may also be added to the award. In certain cases, the commission may have the discretion to award ‘exemplary damages’, reaching up to twice the amount of the actual compensation liable to be paid.
To secure the recovery of these funds, the commission has the authority to order the interim attachment of the movable or immovable property belonging to the respondents. Every claim petition is expected to be decided within one year from the date the issues are framed.
Crucially, every award passed by the claims commission shall be final, and the Bill explicitly states that no appeal shall lie against such awards before any other court. Furthermore, civil courts are barred from entertaining matters that fall under the commission’s jurisdiction.
If an offender fails to pay, the amount will be recovered as an arrear of land revenue, effectively treating it as a public demand against the individual. This legislative framework signals a zero-tolerance approach toward the destruction of property under the guise of public protest.
(Edited by Nardeep Singh Dahiya)