Tag: #CriminalLawAmendmentAct

S.no	Contents
1.	INTRODUCTION
2.	UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF CORRUPTION
3.	HISTORY OF CORRUPTION IN INDIA
4.	REASONS FOR RISING CORRUPTION IN INDIA
5.	EFFECTS OR CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION
6.	STEPS TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT TO CURB THE PRACTICES
7.	EVOLUTION OF THE ACT
8.	AMENDMENTS IN ACT FOR BETTER WORKING
9.	PENALTY AFTER 2018 AMENDMENT
10.	CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION 

Even after 75 years of Independence India is struggling or lacking to resolve the expanding problem of corruption in the nation. Corruption is the practice that is prevailing in the roots of the nation to get work done through backdoors or an illegal or illicit way and at the same time it is acting as a backfire step in the evolution or growth of the nation. The practice of corruption is seen as a hindrance and as a major barrier to success for developing countries like India. As India is a country with a vast and growing population is a tough and challenging problem to regulate or control the activity which is against the law. India is not only the country facing the problem of corruption every growing or evolving nation in the present world faces complications regarding corruption practices prevailing in the nation. This problem was significantly neglected or ignored by the government at the starting point as they felt that these practices will not affect the nation in a threatening way but after reviewing and scrutinizing the corruption practices the government felt there should be policies, acts, regulations structured or designed in such a way so that it can curb the problem of corruption. So the government decided to frame or structure policies, acts, statutes, and norms that can considerably regulate this growing constraint. 

UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF CORRUPTION 

“Corruption” is described as “the unlawful use of governmental authority for private gain.” This abuse of power weakens a democracy by undermining trust between two or more parties. Additionally, corruption may exacerbate poverty and inequality while impeding a country’s ability to prosper economically. Understanding how corruption operates is crucial to exposing it and holding the dishonest accountable for establishing a corrupt system. The growth of the nation is badly impacted by its aftermath and acts as a hindrance toward the systematic and continuous progress of the nation.

HISTORY OF CORRUPTION IN INDIA 

We are natives of Gandhi’s country, for whom the essential tenets of life were honesty and nonviolence. I will use the 2000-year-old Vedic proverb “Satyam vadhadharmam charah” as an example. The motto of our country is Satyameva Jayate. Therefore, we all support honesty and truth, at least on a lip service level. Our government thinks that telling the truth will win, and all of our major faiths support this idea. However, India is one of the most corrupt nations in the world.

The actual degree of corruption in India is unknown. However, everyone is aware of how ubiquitous it is and how it is steadily eroding the nation’s foundation. There is little question that the future of democracy is in jeopardy if corruption, bribery, and nepotism are not stopped as soon as possible. The parallel is distressing to those of us who are aware of the high moral standards that prevailed before and shortly after India became an independent nation. We seek in vain the integrity, effectiveness, quality, and commitment to duty that once distinguished government. One starts to doubt whether we are the same people that rode to independence with the motto “truth and sacrifice.” A nation or society can improve its ability to reduce corruption to manageable levels by taking a comprehensive strategy and including all of the key players in the anti-corruption reform process. However, none of this can be dealt with without wise and tenacious political leadership. without substantial levels of public backing and knowledge, as well as without a driven and competent corporate sector. In many nations, creating a thriving wicked society that is willing and able to play a significant role in influencing its surroundings is the most challenging aspect of the equation.

REASONS FOR RISING CORRUPTION IN INDIA 

The corruption practices have been happening due to various reasons in the system of the nation. Therefore, mentioning and discussing a few of them will surely highlight the main reasons for corruption.

1. Low Pay Scale of Government Employees- At present in India, there is a sterling increase in the demand for government jobs due to the security of jobs its offers and other benefits it gives to its employees. Due to the huge population and growing population, there is expanding demand for government jobs as everyone cannot secure his place in the private sector. A person who tirelessly prepares for getting a government job in India and if he is selected, he does not see any financial gain or activity of efforts which he has undergone while preparing for his exam. He, therefore, chooses an unethical way to gain more money in less period. 
2. Lack of Accountability- A government employee is not responsible for reporting his duty or activity or any of the work carried out by him on a specific day. Therefore, he thinks that he is free to act in his way and not to abide by ethics or behaviour. It was after the passing of some acts legislations and statutes that brought the illegal practice of corruption under the surveillance of the government.
3. Lack of Stick and Fast Punishments- One of the most crucial features of the government job is that there is a lack of punishment which a government employee can get if he is involved in corruption. If he is involved in corruption investigation proceedings are undertaken against him which do not render any result and the employee is transferred from one place to another or merely there is suspended for a particular period. 
4. Greed and the Need of becoming rich overnight- One of the main reasons for growing corruption is the mindset of the people working in the government sector. The need and desire to become rich and successful is also a motivating factor in involving such type of heinous activity. 
5. Tolerance of corruption by the people- In the present world where everyone is busy carrying out his day-to-day activity in the best and most effective way no one wants that his time is wasted on any futile activity which does not render any financial gain. Therefore, when they visit any government office, they try to adopt corrupt practices to get their job done easily. 

EFFECTS OR CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION 

1. Lack of quality of services- The quality of services drastically decreases if one is involved in corrupt practices as he does not put any effort from his side in rendering services and gives services in the easiest way possible which in turn decreases the quality of services that needs to be maintained by the government. 
2. Lack of proper justice- If corruption is taking place in any judicial department or any department which is authorized to provide give basic services to common people then it will affect a large portion of the society. 
3. Low rate of economic growth- The involvement of any government employee will surely affect the growth rate of the nation as it will put a halt to the flow of currency in the economy. There is a hoarding of money in the form of cash, assets, and in the form of stocks which directly plays a role of hindrance in the growth of economy of the nation.
4. Low Foreign Direct Investment- If corruption exists in the government sector foreign investor will hesitate to invest in the nation as they know that their funds or capital will not be utilized in the best and most effective manner. 

STEPS TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT TO CURB THE PRACTICES 

To codify all existing laws, eliminate corruption in government institutions, and prosecute and discipline public servants who commit corrupt activities, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (POCA)¹, was developed. It is a potent weapon against this evil. The success of the anti-corruption campaign depends on how well this legislation works. This Act gives the Central Government the power to appoint judges to look into and try instances involving offenses that are punished under the Act, as well as situations where an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense is made.

EVOLUTION OF THE ACT

The Indian Penal Code of 1860² first addressed cases of bribery and corruption involving public employees in the Indian Justice System. However, it became clear throughout the 1945s that the legislation in place at the time was inadequate to address the circumstances, and it was considered that special rules about bribery and corruption were to be established. As a result, the Prevention of Corruption Act, of 1947³, was impressively enacted. The Anti-Corruption Laws (Amendment) Act of 1964⁴ and the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952⁵, both of which were based on the Santhanam Committee’s recommendations, respectively, altered the 1947 Act twice.

As a result, the 1988 Prevention of Corruption Act, which became effective on September 9, 1988, was based on the 1947 Act. To make the whole resolution more feasible and eradicate corruption in Indian government offices and public sector organizations, it was intended to enhance the standards and widen the inclusion of anti-corruption laws. The Prevention of Corruption Act’s goal is to eradicate corruption throughout Indian government agencies and the public sector.

The extent of corruption in government organizations must be understood, but it’s also critical to prosecute and discipline public employees who take part in corrupt activities. The Act also takes into account individuals who helped the offenders commit the bribery or corruption offense.

AMENDMENTS IN ACT FOR BETTER WORKING 

Some of the amendments were done in the year 2013 and 2018 which was related to bribery and the period given to Special Judges (Section 4)⁶ for investigating the case.

2013’s Amendments 

1. Bribery was declared a criminal offense. A person who was forced to bribe will not be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act if they disclose the incident to law authorities within seven days.
2. The modified criminal misbehaviour law addressed two different sorts of offenses. Illegal enrichment, which is defined as accumulating money that is out of proportion to one’s sources of income, and fraudulent property misappropriation are the offenses.
3. The modifications were made with the pertinent government authority’s prior consent to undertake any inquiry into any offenses allegedly committed in public instances. However, if the criminal has already been detained for accepting bribes, then this authorization is not required.
4. If a special judge is handling the case, the PCA trial limit was set at two years. Only four years should be allowed for the trial’s overall duration.

2018’s Amendments

1. Bribery is a particular and explicit offense.
2. Anyone who accepts bribes faces a fine and a jail sentence of three to seven years.
3. Bribe-givers may additionally face a fine and a sentence of up to 7 years in jail.
4. In the case that the incident is reported to law enforcement within 7 days, the 2018 amendment adds a provision to safeguard persons who have been coerced to pay a bribe.
5. It redefines criminal behaviour to just include property theft and having an excessive amount of assets.
6. By requiring that investigative agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation obtain prior clearance from a competent authority before starting an inquiry into them, it proposes a “shield” to protect government employees, including those who have retired, from punishment.
7. However, it specifies that such authorizations are not required in situations when a person is immediately detained on suspicion of taking or attempting to accept an unfair benefit for himself or another person.
8. The concept of “undue advantage” must be proven in every case of corruption involving a public employee.
9. Within two years, the trial in instances involving the payment of bribes and corruption must be concluded. Furthermore, the trial cannot be longer than four years, even with justifiable delays.
10. It includes the potential for business organizations that provide bribes to face sanctions or legal action. However, they don’t apply to nonprofit organizations.
11. It outlines the authority and processes for seizing and forfeiting the property of a public official suspected of corruption.

PENALTY AFTER 2018 AMENDMENT 

The penalty for an infraction committed by a public employee has been increased under Sections 7⁷, 12⁸, and 14⁹ of the Amendment Act from a minimum penalty of 6 months to a minimum punishment of 3 years and from a maximum punishment of 5 years to 7 years, with or without fine. In situations of abetment, sentences also go longer.

When a crime is committed repeatedly, the penalty is increased from a minimum of 2 years to 5 years and a maximum of 7 years to 10 years in jail.

1. Corruption by Public Servant: The Prevention of Corruption Act of 2018’s¹⁰, Section 13 made reference to the misappropriation of assets and unfair justifications for doing so. It offered the justification for making a criminal misconduct accusation against the public employee.
2. Sanctions for Prosecution: According to the 2018 Prevention of Corruption Act¹¹, any prosecution of public employees must get the approval of the relevant government. Section 17A of the Amendment Act¹² expands the protection to include inquiries or investigations made before prosecution. Therefore, neither a police officer nor a former one may open an investigation into a public employee.

CONCLUSION 

One thing is abundantly clear from the above analysis: Corruption threatens not only the national or global economy but also the entire human race. Thousands of people and families in India are living in extreme poverty and are unable to access even the most basic necessities for survival. As a result, they are forced to bear the harsh consequences of corruption when they are unable to provide the required standard of service.

---

Endnotes:

1. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act No 49 of 1988)
2. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No 45 of 1860)
3. Prevention of Corruption Act (Act No 2 0f 1947)
4. Anti-Corruption Laws (Amendment) Act of 1964
5. Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952
6. Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988
7. Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988
8. Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988
9. Section 14 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988
10. Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 (Act No 16 of 2018)
11. Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 (Act No 16 of 2018)
12. Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 2018

This article is authored by Animesh Nagvanshi, a student at ICFAI University, Dehradun.

Introduction

A country’s law should develop with the progression of time and the progression of time. In troublesome times, as in any respectful society, society requires more thorough and brutal guidelines, however the topic of how much stricter and more rigid a law should remain with regards to making a specific regulation. In India, a far-reaching and comprehensive way to deal with the laws is expected to oversee sexual offenses. A decent code ought to have three attributes, as per Macaulay, the planner of the Indian Penal Code: accuracy (liberated from vagueness), conceivability (simple clear by normal individuals), and it ought to be a product of legislature law-making (least judicial intervention).¹

The world is dynamic; changes happen in light of cultural prerequisites, as well as the overall individuals who have been involved in a situation in that society. For instance, there was basically no law to manage cyber-wrongdoings in the eighteenth century, yet because of innovative enhancements and dynamic perspectives, the Cyber Law grew simply. Because of the startling flood in the number of cyber dangers, ransomware, and other cyber offenses, we understood that law to address these advanced wrongdoings was required. Essentially, the Criminal Law Amendment Bill 2018 proposes to change key bits of the Indian Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Public Order and Security Act, as well as increment the base discipline for assault, including the age part.

Before the 2018 Amendment Act, the Criminal laws has been revised in the year 2013, concerning the previously mentioned issues as they were. The amendment in the criminal laws was required after the Nirbhaya case. Nirbhaya, a 23-year-old paramedical understudy, was violently gang-raped, assaulted, and tortured in a moving transport on the evening of December 16, 2012. She passed on from her wounds on December 28, 2012, in the wake of battling for her life. This deplorable demonstration ignited an impressive shock in the nation over. The public demanded that the charged be hanged, yet in addition that the nation’s assault laws be changed. Following the Nirbhaya episode on December 23, 2012, a three-part council was framed, drove by Late Justice J.S. Verma, previous Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, with Justice Leila Seth, previous Judge of the High Court, and Gopal Subramanium, previous Solicitor General of India, to prescribe changes to the Criminal Law to the Legislature to make assault laws and different violations against ladies more contentious. Accordingly, the Criminal Law Amendment of 2013 was sanctioned.²

Indeed, even after the draconian measures authorized by The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 in the fallout of the Nirbhaya case, the general public was again stunned by a rate in Kathua, Jammu, and Kashmir. An 8-year-old young lady capitulated to a gang’s desire and was sexually assaulted and killed, therefore. This sickening episode fills in as a suggestion to society that the assault culture has continued as well as weavers in our general public, where such violations are finished without risk of punishment. Because of the far-reaching announcing and public objection encompassing the matter, parliament had to take on “restorative measures.” The Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018, was accordingly supported by the bureau and endorsed by the President on April 21, 2018. The announcement hardened the punishments for people blamed for assaulting youths, including capital punishment.

The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013

The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, was approved by the Lok Sabha on March 19, 2013, and the Rajya Sabha on March 21, 2013. The Bill was signed by the President on April 2, 2013, and it was deemed to take effect on February 3, 2013. On 3 February 2013, India’s President, Pranab Mukherjee, issued an Ordinance to that effect.

The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 2013 updated and added new sections to the Indian Penal Code (IPC) relating to numerous sexual offenses. Certain acts were expressly recognized as offenses under the Act, which were dealt with under relevant laws. The Indian Penal Code has been amended to include new offenses such as acid attacks, sexual harassment, voyeurism, and stalking.³ The amendments made by the Act are mentioned as follows:

1. Section 354A
   Previously, a man who makes unwanted sexual advances, forcefully shows pornography, or demands/requests sexual favors from a woman committed the offense of sexual harassment simpliciter under section 354A, which is punishable by up to three years in jail. Sexual harassment, which is punishable by up to a year in prison, also includes making sexually tinged remarks.
2. Section 354B
   If a male assaults or uses unlawful force against a woman, or aids or abets such an act with the goal of disrobing or compelling her to remain naked in a public place, he commits an offense under section 354B, which carries a sentence of three to seven years in prison. This section deals with a fairly specific offense, and it complements and adds to the clause dealing with outraging a woman’s modesty. This is a good provision, given the numerous examples of women being stripped in public as a kind of punishment, mostly in impoverished communities, as reported in the news.
3. Section 354C
   Any man who views or takes the image of a woman engaged in a private act in circumstances where she would normally expect not to be viewed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the perpetrator’s command, and then disseminates such image is guilty. Such a person is liable under Section 354C. A first conviction carries a sentence of imprisonment of not less than one year, but not more than three years, and a fine, while a second or subsequent conviction carries a sentence of imprisonment of either description for a term of not less than three years, but not more than seven years, and a fine.
4. Section 354D
   Under this new section, stalking has been designated as a specific offense. If a male stalks a woman, he could face a sentence of up to three years in jail for the first offense and up to five years for consecutive offenses. However, there are some exceptions, such as if a person can establish that the actions were taken in accordance with the law, were reasonable, or were necessary to avoid a crime. According to Section 354D, the crime of stalking was a gender-neutral offense, meaning that it may be committed by either a man or a woman.
5. Section 375
   Under the new section, a man is considered to have committed rape if:
   (a) Penetration of penis into vagina, urethra, mouth, or anus of any person, or making any other person do so with him or any other person;
   (b) Insertion of any object or any body part, not being a penis, into the vagina, urethra, mouth, or anus of any person, or making any other person do so with him or any other person;
   (c) Possession of any bodily part with the intent of inducing penetration of the vagina, urethra, mouth, anus, or any other body part of the individual, or compelling the subject to do so with him or another individual.
   (d) Applying the mouth to a woman’s penis, vagina, anus, or urethra, or causing another person to do so with him or another person.;
   (e) Ultimately, contact the vagina, penis, anus, or bosom of the individual or makes the individual touch the vagina, penis, anus, or bosom of that individual or some other individual.

The 2013 Act expands the meaning of rape to incorporate oral sex and the inclusion of a thing or other real part into a lady’s vagina, urethra, or anus. Rape carries a minimum sentence of seven years in jail and a maximum sentence of life in prison. If a police officer, medical officer, army member, jail officer, public officer, or public servant commits rape, he faces a minimum sentence of ten years in prison. If the victim dies or goes into a vegetative state as a result of the rape, the victim is sentenced to life in prison, with the possibility of death. Under the newly revised provisions, gang rape now carries a minimum sentence of 20 years in prison.

The new amendment clarifies that “consent” is an unequivocal agreement to engage in a specific sexual act; it also clarifies that “consent” does not entail “no resistance.” Non-consent is a crucial component in the commission of rape. As a result, the notion of consent is crucial to the outcome of a rape trial, and it has been used to humiliate and discredit rape victims.⁴

Need for Criminal Amendment Act

According to research by the “Thomson Reuters Foundation,” sexual violence, human trafficking, child labor, underage marriage, and female foeticide make India the most dangerous country for women. In 2012, the National Record Crime Bureau (NRCB) documented 24,923 rape crimes across India, according to its annual report for the year 2013. The culprit was discovered to be a relative of the victim in 98 percent of the cases. Assault has a very low per capita rate and, as a rule, it goes unreported. However, rape instances such as the Kathua rape case and the Unnao rape case sparked considerable public resentment. And a sense of censure leads to media attention and public protests in the name of justice. As a result of the increased willingness to disclose rape incidents, the Indian government has made revisions to the current penal legislation. As a result, the Criminal Amendment Act was absolutely necessary.⁵

Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018

On July 23, 2018, the Ministry of Law and Justice introduced the Criminal Law Amendment Bill 2018, which was passed by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on July 30 and August 6, respectively. This law attempts to address the problems of sexual assault victims and to enforce the death sentence for anyone convicted of raping a girl under the age of 16 or 12.⁶ It repealed the President of India’s April ordinance and made changes to the following laws:

• IPC 1860
• CrPC 1973
• Evidence Act 1872
• Protection of Child from Sexual Offences (POCSO) 2012

Salient Feature of the Act

This Act makes significant reforms to our penal laws to protect girls from the horrible crime of rape. The following are the details⁷:

• Rape offenders must serve at least ten years in prison; formerly, the minimum sentence was seven years.
• Anyone who rapes a girl under the age of 16 will be sentenced to a minimum of 20 years in prison.
• If a person rapes a girl under the age of 12, he or she will be sentenced to a minimum of 20 years in jail, a maximum of life in prison, or the death penalty.
• If the rape crime is committed against a girl under the age of 16, the accused will not be given anticipatory bail.
• Convicted persons are required to pay the victim, with the funds going toward the victim’s medical expenses and rehabilitation. And the remuneration will be fair and equitable.
• If a police officer commits rape, he or she will be sentenced to a minimum of 10 years in jail, regardless of where the crime takes place.
• In the case of rape, the police are required to conclude the investigation within two months of the FIR being filed.
• After 6 months, the deadline to dispose of the rape appeal begins.
• The law stipulates that anyone guilty of gang rape of a woman under the age of 16 will be sentenced to life in prison and fined.
• Anyone convicted of gang rape of women under the age of 12 faces a sentence of life in prison, a fine, or the death penalty if they are under the age of 12.

Amendments made in IPC

Inserted Sections

I. Section 376AB

• This section was inserted just after Section 376A and states that anyone who commits rape with a woman under the age of 12 years shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than 20 years, and it may extend to life imprisonment, implying that what he has done is thoroughly illegal and off-base, or in a legal sense, a reminder for that person’s natural life, as well as a fine or death penalty.
• Also obligated to pay compensation, which must be reasonable and just in order to cover medical costs and victim rehabilitation.
• Furthermore, any payment made by the person who has been condemned under this clause must be made to the individual in issue (victim).

II. Section 376DA

• After Section 370D, the 376DA section was added, which states that if a woman under the age of sixteen is raped by one or more people in a group or does something for a common purpose, each of those people is deemed to have committed the crime of rape and shall be punished with life imprisonment, which implies that what he has done is completely illegal and off-base, or in a legal sense, a reminder for that person’s natural life. A
• Also obligated to pay compensation, which must be reasonable and just in order to cover medical costs and victim rehabilitation.
• Furthermore, any payment made by the person who has been condemned under this clause must be made to the individual in issue (victim).

III. Section 376DB

• This section states that if a woman under the age of 12 years is raped by one or more people acting in concert for a common purpose, each person is deemed to have committed the crime of rape and is punished with life imprisonment, which implies that what he has done is thoroughly illegal and off-base, or in a legal sense, a reminder for that person’s natural life, as well as a fine or death penalty.
• Also obligated to pay compensation, which must be reasonable and just in order to cover medical costs and victim rehabilitation.
• Furthermore, any payment made by the person who has been condemned under this clause must be made to the individual in issue (victim).

Amended Sections

I. Section 166A
This provision comprises three clauses that deal with public servants violating lawful orders. Sections 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB are substituted for clause (c).

II. Section 228A
Subsection (1) of this section was replaced with Sections 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB, which deal with the disclosure of the identity of the victim of certain crimes.

III. Section 376
This section deals with the rape penalty and sub-section 1 was replaced with “anyone commits an offence of rape shall be punished for a term not less than ten years or which may extend to life imprisonment and with fine.”
Subsection 2 clause (a) sub-section 1 has been repealed as a result of this alteration to section 376. After sub-section 2 of section 376, a new sub-section “3” was added, which states that anyone who commits rape with a woman under the age of sixteen years shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than 20 years, and may extend to life imprisonment, implying that what he has done is thoroughly illegal and off-base, or in a legal sense, a reminder for that person’s natural life, as well as a fine or detention.

Also obligated to pay compensation, which must be reasonable and just in order to cover medical costs and victim rehabilitation. After sub-section 2 of section 376, a new sub-section “3” was added, which states that anyone who commits rape with a woman under the age of sixteen years shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than 20 years, and may extend to life imprisonment, implying that what he has done is thoroughly illegal and off-base, or in a legal sense, a reminder for that person’s natural life, as well as a fine or detention.

Also obligated to pay compensation, which must be reasonable and just in order to cover medical costs and victim rehabilitation. Furthermore, any payment made by the person who has been condemned under this clause must be made to the individual in issue (victim).

Amendments made in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Two sections of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 are amended by the Criminal Amendment Act of 2018. The following are some of them:

A. Section 53A

• This section substitutes Sections 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB, which deal with proof of character or previous sexual experience that isn’t applicable in some circumstances.

B. 146th section

• When a witness is cross-examined, he may be asked any question that tends to answer the question hereinbefore referred to, in addition to the question hereinbefore referred to-
  a) Attempt to verify the validity.
  b) To figure out who he is and where he stands in life.
  c) To protect his reputation, harming his character, even if the answer does not directly or indirectly implicate him, could result in a penalty or forfeiture.
• 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB were substituted by section 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB.

Amendments made in CrPC

1. Section 173
   Subsection (1A) of this section was amended to read: “An offense under section 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB or section 376E of the Indian penal code shall be completed within two months.”
2. Section 374
   When an appeal is filed against a sentence given under Section 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB, or Section 376E of the Indian penal code, the appeal shall be disposed of within six months of the date of filing.
3. Section 377
   When an appeal is filed against a sentence given under sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB, or section 376E of the Indian penal code, the appeal shall be disposed of within six months of the date of filing.
4. Section 438
   After sub-section (3), a new sub-section (4) was added to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that nothing in this section applies to any case involving the arrest of a person on suspicion of having committed an offense under subsection (3) of Section 376, 376AB, 376DA, or 376DB of the Indian penal code.
5. Section 439
   After sub-section (a) (1), another provision was added to Section 439 of the CrPC, which states that “the high court and the session court shall, before granting bail to a person accused of an offense triable under sub-section (3) of Sections 376, 376AB, 376DA, 376DB, give notice of the applicant for bail to the public prosecutor within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of such notice to the public prosecutor.” The presence of the informant or any person authorized by him is necessary during the hearing of the application for bail to the person under sub-section (3) of sections 376, 376A, 376DA, and 376DB, which was inserted after sub-section (1) of the CrPC.

Amendments made in POSCO Act

Section 42 of the POCSO Act, 2012 has been amended by the Criminal Amendment Act of 2018. Sections 376A, 376C, and 376D of the Indian penal code have been replaced with 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, and 376DB of the Indian penal code.

Conclusion

In the wake of checking on various adjustments and recently remembered Sections for the IPC, CrPC, Indian Evidence Act, and POCSO Act, as may be obvious, the criminal amendment demonstration of 2018 is simply planned to safeguard women from offensive wrongdoing: sexual attack. As the unjust pace of sexual attacks has expanded, so has the number of people who are truly cruel. Most of the assault cases go unreported, and the absence of legitimate legitimacy, as well as cultural elements, make boundaries to the casualty’s admittance to justice. Nonetheless, subsequent to rolling out important improvements to these reformatory laws, the Government of India tries to give government assistance and a feeling of safety for all women, as it is essential considering ongoing cases, for example, the Kathua assault and Unnao assault cases, which have caused a lamentable circumstance for women in which women accept they are undependable even in their own homes, as the blamed is quite often a family member or a known individual of the person in question, so there is an outright need.

References:

1. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1527–an-analysis-of-criminal-law-amendment-act-2018.html
2. https://blog.ipleaders.in/comparison-rape-laws-criminal-amendment-act-2013/
3. https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/criminal-law-amendment/
4. https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-criminal-law-amendment-bill-2013
5. https://blog.ipleaders.in/criminal-law-amendment-act-2018-2/
6. https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-criminal-law-amendment-bill-2018#:~:text=In%20March%202013%2C%20Parliament%20passed,in%20cases%20of%20repeat%20offenders
7. https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/CSdivTheCriminalLawAct_14082018_0.pdf

This article is written by Arryan Mohanty, a 2nd Year Student student of Symbiosis Law School.

A Journalist and others, accused of destroying ballot boxes and firing during gram panchayat elections in UP were granted anticipatory bail by Allahabad HC. This was granted by a Single-Judge Bench of Justice Rajeev Singh on June 9, while hearing a criminal miscellaneous anticipatory bail application filed by Shiv Prasad Harijan and another on behalf of the applicants in a case registered under relevant Sections of Indian Penal Code, Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Peoples Representation Act at Police Station Kandhai in district Pratapgarh of Uttar Pradesh.

Shiv Prasad, as a reporter of Hindi newspaper Pratap Kiran, reported that On April 19, 2021, the election of gram panchayat was scheduled and he was covering the news at polling booth (village Utrash), wherein he reported about the irregularities on the polling both by authorities and influential people via Twitter. The annoyed authorities and police beat up the voters on the spot. On objecting, an FIR was lodged and the villagers and applicants along with their families were dragged into this, because of the coverage of mismanagement of authorities

The applicant’s counsel opposed the allegations of firing and destruction of ballot boxes by the villagers as the police intended to arrest them due to the reporting and coverage on Twitter. He also states that the applicants are entitled to get anticipatory bail instead of their cooperation in the investigation. Whereas the Additional Government Advocate opposed the anticipatory bail by stating the instructions of the FIR.

The Court ordered that till the next date of listing, Shiv Prasad and Ramdhari in the aforesaid case shall be released forthwith by the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, on their furnishing personal bond of Rs 50,000 with the following conditions:

• The applicant shall show up for interrogations as and when required.
• The applicant in no way shall tamper with facts so as mislead the facts to court or police
• The applicants cannot leave the district without courts prior permission.

The next hearing date is on 7 July 2021

-Report by Saksham Srivastava