New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) filed against the three recently enacted criminal laws replacing the IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act.
At the outset, a vacation bench presided over by Justice Bela M Trivedi told the petitioner-in-person that the plea was liable to be dismissed.
Sensing the disinclination of the apex court to entertain the plea, petitioner advocate Vishal Tiwari said that he may be allowed to withdraw the plea with the liberty to make a representation to the government.
“Do whatever you want… This petition has been filed in a very casual and cavalier manner. If you would have argued more, we would have dismissed it with costs. But, since you are withdrawing it, we are not imposing costs,” said the Bench, also comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal.
Ultimately, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn without any liberty to make a representation.
The PIL said that Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita suffer from “many defects and discrepancies”.
“All three criminal laws were passed and enacted without any parliamentary debate as unfortunately most of the members were under suspension during the period,” it said.
Further, it claimed that the title of the three laws is not accurate as per the Interpretation of Statutes and does not speak about the statute and its motive but is ambiguous in nature.
In a recent judgment, the top court urged the legislature to consider making necessary changes in the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 providing punishment to the husband and his family for inflicting any cruelty on a married woman.
It said that Sections 85 and 86 of the new penal code, which is to come into force with effect from July 1, are nothing but verbatim reproduction of Section 498A of the IPC, 1860 and the issue requires a relook by the legislature taking into consideration the pragmatic realities.
IANS
