In a historic move, the Punjab and Haryana High Court lauded the introduction of new criminal laws, marking a transformative phase in India’s legal landscape. The enforcement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) was hailed as a monumental step towards revitalizing the justice system.
The Court emphasized that these new legislations, deeply rooted in Indian jurisprudence, have shed the colonial vestiges that hindered the justice system’s efficacy. This evolution, according to Justice Sumeet Goel, renews faith in the judicial process, freeing it from outdated frameworks that undermined its potential.
However, the Court acknowledged that adapting to these changes might pose challenges for those accustomed to the old laws. Emphasizing the necessity of embracing the spirit of the new era, the Court urged legal professionals to leverage these changes for positive transformation, rather than resisting them.
The new laws promise a balanced approach, enhancing the robustness of prosecution while ensuring fairness to both the state and the accused. This shift aims to strengthen deterrence and streamline the judicial process.
Justice Goel’s remarks came during the hearing of a petition seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR). The petition’s maintainability was contested by the state as it was filed under the outdated Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) rather than the newly implemented BNSS.
The Court concluded that with the advent of BNSS on July 1, the CrPC ceased to hold relevance, except for cases pending before that date. It clarified that any legal actions initiated under the CrPC post-July 1 would be considered non-maintainable and subject to dismissal.
Key conclusions included the invalidity of appeals or petitions filed under the CrPC after July 1 and the applicability of BNSS provisions to all such cases moving forward.
In light of these determinations, the Court dismissed the current petition filed under the CrPC.
Representatives for the petitioner and the Union Territory of Chandigarh included Advocate Ujwal Anand, Public Prosecutor Manish Bansal, Advocate Shubham Mangla, and Advocate Diksha Sharma.
