Here's how government is removing colonial hangover in new criminal laws

New Delhi: Words like ‘Parliament of the United Kingdom’, ‘Provincial Act’, ‘notification by the Crown Representative’, ‘London Gazette’, ‘any Dominion, colony or possession of his Majesty, ‘Jury’, ‘Lahore’, ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,’ ‘Commonwealth,’ ‘Her Majesty or by the Privy Council,’ ‘Her Majesty’s Government,’ ‘copies or extracts contained in the London Gazette, or purporting to be printed by the Queen’s Printer.’ ‘possession of the British Crown,’ ‘Court of Justice in England’, ‘Her Majesty’s Dominions’, and ‘Barrister’ will not find mention in the new act that will replace Indian Evidence Act. 

The new Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 replaces the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and it will not find any colonial terms anymore. 

In the new act, five sections of the existing IE Act have been deleted, 23 sections of the existing IE Act have been amended, one new section has been added and 149 sections of the existing IE Act remain unchanged.

Government officials said a number of reports of the Law Commission of India and Committees constituted by the Government had made recommendations for section-specific amendments in the three major Criminal Laws. 

Besides, from time to time, serious incidents like the Nirbhaya Rape Case in Delhi or sometimes judgements of the Supreme Court/High Court also contributed towards amendments in the three major Criminal Laws. 

As a result, though changes have been made, they were piecemeal in nature.

Officials also outlined the rationale behind the major overhaul of laws by saying recommendations for a comprehensive review of the Criminal Justice System in the country had been suggested by Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs. The report of the 146th Committee in 2010, the 128th report in 2006 and the 111th report in 2005 called for rationalising the Criminal Laws of the country and bringing comprehensive legislation instead of piecemeal amendments.

Most of these reports pointed towards inordinate delays in investigation, inadequate use of forensic evidence in the investigation, overcrowding of prisons, poor use of technology in legal systems, complex legal procedures, large pendency of cases in the Courts, low conviction rate, etc. These issues ultimately caused delays in providing justice to the citizens.