Handcuffs should not be used for economic offenders, recommends parliamentary panel
New Delhi (PTI): People taken into custody for economic offences should not be handcuffed and clubbed with those arrested for heinous crimes such as rape and murder, a parliamentary committee has recommended.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, headed by BJP MP Brijlal, also recommended changes to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) on the issue of police custody of an accused beyond the first 15 days from arrest.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS-2023) bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11 along with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS-2023) and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA-2023) bills.
The three proposed laws seek to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1898, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively.
The parliamentary panel noted that it felt the use of handcuffs, as outlined in Clause 43(3) of the BNSS, is appropriately restricted to select heinous crimes to prevent escape of individuals accused of serious offences and ensure safety of police officers and staffers during arrests.
However, the committee is of the view that "economic offences" should not be included in this category. This is because the term "economic offences" encompasses a wide range of offences -- from petty to serious -- and therefore, it may not be suitable for blanket application of handcuffing in all cases falling under this category.
"The committee, therefore, recommends that Clause 43(3) may be suitably amended to delete the words 'economic offences' from the clause," the panel said.
Clause 43(3) of the BNSS states: "The police officer may, keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence, use handcuff while effecting the arrest of a person who is a habitual, repeat offender who escaped from custody, who has committed offence of organised crime, offence of terrorist act, drug related crime, or offence of illegal possession of arms and ammunition, murder, rape, acid attack, counterfeiting of coins and currency notes, human trafficking, sexual offences against children, offences against the State, including acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India or economic offences."
On the issue of police custody of an accused, the committee noted that Clause 187(2) of the BNSS stipulates a total of 15 days for police custody, to be utilised in whole or in parts at any time, during the initial 40 days or 60 days out of the detention period of 60 days or 90 days, as applicable.
However, there is a concern that this clause could be vulnerable to misuse by authorities as it does not explicitly clarify that the custody was not taken in the first 15 days either due to the conduct of the accused or due to extraneous circumstances beyond the control of the investigating officer.
"The committee recommends that a suitable amendment may be brought to provide greater clarity in the interpretation of this clause. The commission also recommends that in Clause 482 of the BNSS, the words 'the accused may be required for police custody beyond the first fifteen days' may be added," it noted.
Under the current Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), police custody can be sought and granted only during the first 15 days of detention, for a maximum of 15 days.
The clause stipulates a total of 15 days for police custody, but allows authorities to use this in whole or in parts at any time during the initial 40 days (for offences carrying up to 10 years of punishment) or in the first 60 days (for offences carrying punishment beyond 10 years).
The reports of the parliamentary panel were submitted to the Rajya Sabha on Friday.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Allahabad High Court says Muslim man can marry multiple times if wives are treated equally
New Delhi: The Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man can marry more than once if he respects all of his wives equally and follows the standards outlined in Islamic law. The court, however, emphasized that the opportunity for polygamy is frequently abused by men for selfish purposes.
while hearing a petition filed by a man called Furkan to invalidate the chargesheet, cognisance, and summons issued against him by a Moradabad court, Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deswal made the statement.
The case, which dates back to 2020, a woman filed a complaint alleging that Furkan had married her without disclosing that he was already married. She also accused him of rape. Based on her complaint, a case was registered at the Moradabad police station, and summons were issued to Furkan and two others.
Furkan’s counsel argued that the woman had acknowledged entering into a relationship with him before marriage and contended that the second marriage could not constitute an offence under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with bigamy as muslim men are allowed to marry more than once.
The High Court referring to the Shariat Act, 1937, noted in its 18-page judgement, that under Muslim personal law, a man may marry up to four times, subject to the condition that he treats all wives equally. The court said Furkan’s second marriage was valid as both women were Muslim.
Justice Deswal also expressed support for the implementation of a Uniform Civil Code, remarking that issues of marriage and divorce should be addressed in accordance with personal law until such a code is enacted. The matter has been listed for the next hearing on May 26.
