PANAJI
As the Central government’s ambitious three criminal laws with a distinct “Bharat” flavour came into effect from Monday, legal professionals lauded this as a monumental step while a few expressed reservations.
Assistant Solicitor General of India Advocate Pravin Faldesai said the new laws -- part of a broader scheme has prioritized justice for citizens while ousting historical inadequacies.
“The thought behind this reordering is to get that Bharat flavour in it and to make it more effective, easier, accessible, more organized and powerful. Above all to make it more citizen-centric and justice-oriented,” he said speaking to The Goan.
Asked if old cases will be governed by the old law, ASG Faldesai maintained the new law cannot be made applicable with retrospective effect. “As per Supreme Court Judgments in other contexts, benefits arising from new enactment can be made applicable retrospectively; but stringent provisions cannot be made applicable,” he said.
He further stated that the reforms address long-standing issues within the old legal framework, particularly concerning sexual offenses against women.
“It is so unfortunate that originally there was only one section dealing with sexual offenses against women; that too in Chapter 16, against Human Body, Section 299…Offenses against women surface at Section 375, punishable under Section 376. The last section in that chapter is Section 377,” Faldesai said highlighting the inadequacies of the old laws.
Echoing this view, Public Prosecutor Sushma Mandrekar stated that the systematically structured law has created intriguing provisions where punishment and reformation coexist. Moreover, the law now includes special requirements for transgenders and insists on electronic evidence.
“Community service is a strict punishment for convicts sentenced to under three years of imprisonment. There is also an insistence on electronic evidence for the recording of statements from victims and witnesses,” she said.
The PP also lauded that those neglected earlier are now covered under the new law. “Transgender community has separate provisions unlike the earlier law which only considered males and females. In another impressive move, under this law, senior citizens are given protection wherein if the police want to question them, permission from the deputy superintendent of police is required,” she added.
Senior criminal lawyer Advocate Galileo Teles voiced concern stating the new legislation, though comprehensive, raises questions about whether amending existing laws would have been a simpler approach.
“Amending specific provisions where necessary could have streamlined the process, avoiding the need for entirely new legislation. Implementing the new laws during the initial stages may lead to chaos and confusion amongst the public litigants and the judicial members,” Teles opined.
Advocate Raju Poulekar cited some unresolved issues within the new system claiming the new law could have been better. “For example, the new law is introduced for prevention, detection, and speediness for disposal. If that’s the case, many areas are not considered, like what when a victim or witness turns hostile during the trial? People might file a case of forgery against them but this issue is not thought about in the new law,” he stated, referring to electronic evidence.
Teles stated that although a Certificate under Section 65B is required to validate electronic evidence, the new legislation simplifies this by allowing any person in charge of the device to sign the Certificate.
“However there are no sufficient safeguards concerning the handling of such records during investigation,” he added.
The legal experts admit that until the cases under the old law are disposed, they will continue alongside the new law. "Irony will be for the same offense, the punishment under both the laws would be different," Teles said.
