The country has started a welcome debate on the three bills that the government has introduced in parliament to replace the three existing and vintage criminal law codes. The need for changes in these laws has been voiced for a long time as many of their provisions are based on outdated ideas, procedures and punishments. But it should be noted that the new bills have not attempted a total overhaul but only some changes through addition, deletion and amendment of some provisions. The new penal code seeks to take away 22 provisions in the old code, amend 175, and add eight new provisions. The structure of the system of justice — the hierarchy of courts, their functions and relative powers, and the nature of the policing system — remains the same. It is the laws through which the system works, and their language, in which some change is sought to be effected.
The bills — the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill — have been presented as new legal codes in content and style. But there is scepticism whether they really needed to be presented as totally new legislation because much of the content of the old codes has been retained and there is little fresh content. Amendments and deletions in the old codes may have achieved the purpose of changing and updating the laws. But the government seems to have wanted to put its imprint on the laws and claim the credit for introducing a new system that ostensibly exorcises the colonial ghost. The naming of all the bills in Hindi is also part of the wish to claim ownership and credit and to make it sound authentically national in the Hindi belt region. That gives them a political angle. This was wholly unnecessary and can create discomfort in non-Hindi states. When all laws have their translations in Indian languages, referring to their titles in Hindi while the content is in English is odd. This can still be changed. In any case, the provisions in the bills may be amended on the basis of the debate and discussions in the country and later in parliament.
The three bills have not attempted a total change of concepts of justice with respect to many offences. There is even a retrograde movement as, for example, in the matter of the death penalty. While there is a movement against the death penalty all over the world and increasing demand for its abolition in India, the Sanhita has proposed to increase the number of offences that attract the penalty. The continuation of the provision for solitary confinement is also against the norms of enlightened justice.