Is additional security necessary for organized criminals? SC’s question on the petition challenging the new criminal law

New Delhi: While hearing a petition challenging the new criminal law, the Supreme Court questioned whether there should be safeguard measures for those accused of organized crimes. The bench called for consideration of the issue as to whether there should be additional safeguards in the legal process for persons involved in organized crime. The Supreme Court has been approached questioning the constitutional validity of several provisions of the new criminal law.

The petitioner’s lawyer gave this argument

Earlier, advocate Dr. Maneka Guruswamy, appearing for the petitioner, argued that through the new codes, organized crime (like MCOCA) has been brought under the ambit of common law (Indian Judicial Code, 2023 i.e. BNS). Doing so removes the safeguards and protections set out for the accused in special laws that were earlier enacted to deal with organized crime. Dr. Guruswami emphasized that considering the nature of organized crimes and their complexities, special security measures and provisions are necessary in cases related to them but the same is not there in the new General Law.

Challenge given in Supreme Court

Several provisions of the Indian Civil Defense Code (BNSS) and the Indian Civil Code (BNS) have been challenged in the Supreme Court. Both these laws have replaced the earlier CrPC and IPC and both the laws have come into effect from July 1. Also, Indian Evidence Act has been implemented in place of Indian Evidence Act.

Sections 111 and 113 of the Indian Judicial Code have been challenged. Under this, a provision has been made in the law to stop organized crime and terror activities. It has been said in the petition that this crime has been included in the general law under the said legal provision. For such crime, there was already a special act related to MCOCA and illegal activities in which the procedure was fixed and safeguards were fixed, but in the current new law, it has been kept in the general law and no safeguard has been given.

At the same time, section 152 of BNS has been questioned and it has been said that the earlier sedition law has been re-introduced. Whereas the earlier sedition law was defined in Section 124A of the IPC which was challenged in the Supreme Court. At the same time, the petitioner has raised questions on Section 173 (3) of BNSAS and said that the police has been given special power to register a case or not after the complaint. She can file a case on the basis of preliminary investigation, here she has got the right to pick and choose.