New Delhi: The revised Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, which seeks to replace the existing Indian Penal Code and introduced in the Parliament Tuesday, has significantly broadened the definition of terrorism.
Under the proposed law, any damage or destruction to property intended for the defense of India or any other governmental purposes, even if done in a foreign country, will be classified as an “act of terror”.
In the earlier bill introduced in August, this definition had been limited to damage to government or public facilities, public places, private property within India and critical infrastructure.
According to sources in the Ministry of Home Affairs, the decision to include damage to property outside the country under the definition of “act of terror” was influenced by this year’s attacks on Indian consulates abroad, including in San Francisco, London and Canada by Sikh extremists. These cases are currently under probe by the National Investigation Agency.
In another significant addition to the bill, threat to “economic security” was included as an act of terror.
The new bill specifies that any act conducted with an intent to threaten or likely to threaten the unity, integrity, sovereignty, security, or “economic security” of India, will be considered an act of terror.
According to the bill, damaging India’s monetary stability by engaging in production or circulation of counterfeit currency is categorised as an act of terror.
The National Investigation Agency has been working to bust international rackets of counterfeit currency in the past and has registered several cases under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah Tuesday introduced three revised criminal reform bills in the Lok Sabha, after withdrawing the versions that had been tabled by it in Parliament in August.
The Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, 2023, Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill, 2023 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, 2023, seek to replace the colonial-era Indian Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure, respectively.
The original bills had been referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for consideration, after being tabled during the monsoon session of Parliament.
After the new revised bills were introduced Tuesday, Shah said that a few major changes in the three bills had been made in three-four sub-sections, while the rest of the changes were “mainly grammatical in nature”. He added that a discussion on the bills will take place on 14 and 15 December.
Government sources told ThePrint that nearly 50 suggestions in the old bills were recommended by the parliamentary committee, but not many were incorporated.
ThePrint looks at some of the key changes made in the revised Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Also read: E-summons, videography of seizures — how Shah’s 3 new Bills aim to modernise criminal justice system
‘Abduction of public functionary — a terror act’
The new bill introduces a clause stating that abduction or detention of a person to influence the government of India, a state government or government of any foreign country, will constitute an act of terror.
The section reads: Whoever detains, kidnaps or abducts any person and threatening to kill or injure such person or does any other act in order to compel the Government of India, any State Government or the Government of a foreign country or an international or inter-governmental organisation or any other person to do or abstain from doing any act, commits a terrorist act”.
According to the bill whoever “overawes by means of criminal force or the show of criminal force or attempts to do so or causes death of any public functionary or attempts to cause death of any public functionary” constitutes an act of terror.
Public functionary here would mean the constitutional authorities or any other functionary notified in the Official Gazette by the Central Government as a public functionary.
‘Imprisonment for life or death sentence for mob lynching’
The new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 introduces provisions for life or death sentences for offences linked to mob lynching and hate-crime murder.
This pertains to cases where a mob of five or more acting in concert commits murder on the ground of “race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language, personal belief or any other similar ground”.
In the earlier bill the minimum punishment for this offence had been specified as seven years.
The new provisions are included in Section 103 of the bill that deals with “punishment of murder” for crimes related to mob lynching and hate crimes.
According to the section, when a group of five or more persons acting in concert commits murder on the grounds of race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language, personal belief or any other similar ground “each member of such group shall be punished with death or with imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine”.
The earlier bill in which this was put in sub-clause (2) of section 101 had said: “Each member of such a group shall be punished with death or with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years and shall also be liable to fine.”
This is significant as the Supreme Court in August 2018 had recommended that a separate offence for lynching with adequate punishment be enacted to instill fear among offenders.
Sexual crimes and mental illness
Two key recommendations, to include gender-neutral provision criminalising adultery, and a clause that criminalises non-consensual sex between men, women, transpersons and acts of bestiality in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, have been left out in the revised version.
Meanwhile, on the recommendation of the parliamentary panel, the revised bill has changed the term “mental illness” to “unsound mind”, wherever it has been used in the bill.
This was done because the definition of mental illness is “too wide” with mood disorders, anxiety also being part of it, sources said.
(Edited by Poulomi Banerjee)
Also read: Year after putting sedition cases on hold, SC refers petitions against law to 5-judge bench
and what does the bill say about non indians damaging indian infrastructure overseas?.