Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Recent Criminal Laws in India
India implemented three new criminal laws, namely the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, on July 1, 2024. The legislation seeks to enhance the process of investigations, bolster the rights of victims, and streamline the efficiency of trials.Read more
India implemented three new criminal laws, namely the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, on July 1, 2024. The legislation seeks to enhance the process of investigations, bolster the rights of victims, and streamline the efficiency of trials. Nevertheless, several experts have expressed apprehensions over possible infringements on civil liberties and the augmentation of police authority.
Potential benefits
The laws prioritize restorative justice, perhaps resulting in more equitable results for victims, offenders, and society.
Possible challenges
- Civil liberties: The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita increases the maximum term of police detention from 15 days to either 60 or 90 days, depending on the nature of the crime. These circumstances have prompted worries about possible infringements against civil freedoms.
- Law enforcement authority: According to several attorneys and campaigners, the modifications have the potential to enhance police authority over individuals.
- Accumulated number of unresolved cases: Certain legal experts express concerns that the alterations may result in a rise in legal disputes and contribute to the accumulation of pending cases in the judicial system.
- Unrestrained authority: According to several analysts, law enforcement agencies have been granted unrestricted powers without any mechanisms for oversight or control.
See lessCOMPARITIVE ANALYSIS OF FERA AND FEMA
Here are some major differences between the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and the Foreign Exchange Management Act: FERA and FEMA manage India's foreign currency and payments differently. In 1973, the Indian Parliament passed FERA, which took effect on January 1, 1974, to manage and save foreign cuRead more
Here are some major differences between the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and the Foreign Exchange Management Act:
- FERA and FEMA manage India’s foreign currency and payments differently. In 1973, the Indian Parliament passed FERA, which took effect on January 1, 1974, to manage and save foreign currency at a time of low reserves. FEMA replaced the restricted FERA framework on June 1, 2000, after Parliament authorized it in 1999 to facilitate orderly foreign currency management.
- FERA’s rigorous restrictions reflected the economy and focused on foreign currency management and conservation. A complex 81-section law defined “Authorized persons” carefully and based residence status on citizenship. FERA violations were criminal crimes that carried the possibility of jail and barred legal representation. In addition, infractions were non-compoundable and could not be addressed outside of court.
- However, FEMA’s free and flexible regulation reflected India’s 1990s liberalization ambitions. With just 49 parts, FEMA’s structure is simpler and defines “Authorized persons,” including banks. The past six months of presence in India determines FEMA resident status, not citizenship. FEMA violations are civil infractions punishable by fines, but failure to pay may lead to incarceration. In contrast to FERA, breaches may be settled and the accused can be represented. FEMA added specific directors and courts to streamline appeals compared to FERA Supreme Court appeals.
- FERA’s cautious approach needed RBI approval for FX transactions, limiting operational flexibility. This regulation was repealed by FEMA, making currency transactions easier. FEMA also included information technology requirements to support a modernizing economy, unlike FERA. FERA to FEMA represents India’s transformation from a controlled to a liberalized and growth-oriented economy.
See lessQuestion on Crpc Section 125
On July 10, 2024, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that divorced Muslim women had the right to receive financial support as stipulated in Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The decision confirmed that personal laws cannot supersede a secular law remedy. The court also determined thaRead more
On July 10, 2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that divorced Muslim women had the right to receive financial support as stipulated in Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The decision confirmed that personal laws cannot supersede a secular law remedy. The court also determined that a divorced woman has the right to receive financial support according to Section 125 CrPC, regardless of the reason for the divorce being desertion.
Regardless of the divorced wife’s religious beliefs, Section 125 CrPC requires a husband to provide her maintenance each month. According to Section 125 CrPC, a wife may bring a petition to get her husband to support her if he refuses or fails to do so. Applications for maintenance may be submitted in any district where the spouse responsible for the payment lives, the wife resides, or the spouse last lived with the wife.
See lessQuestion on Crpc Section 125
On July 10, 2024, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that divorced Muslim women had the right to receive financial support as stipulated in Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The decision confirmed that personal laws cannot supersede a secular law remedy. The court also determined thaRead more
On July 10, 2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that divorced Muslim women had the right to receive financial support as stipulated in Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The decision confirmed that personal laws cannot supersede a secular law remedy. The court also determined that a divorced woman has the right to receive financial support according to Section 125 CrPC, regardless of the reason for the divorce being desertion.
Regardless of the divorced wife’s religious beliefs, Section 125 CrPC requires a husband to provide her maintenance each month. According to Section 125 CrPC, a wife may bring a petition to get her husband to support her if he refuses or fails to do so. Applications for maintenance may be submitted in any district where the spouse responsible for the payment lives, the wife resides, or the spouse last lived with the wife.
See less