Modern Crimes, New Laws: How India’s BNS and BNSS Tackle Mob Lynching and Cyber Offenses

 

Modern Crimes, New Laws: How India’s BNS and BNSS Tackle Mob Lynching and Cyber Offenses

India’s criminal law landscape is undergoing a seismic transformation with the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), replacing the centuries-old Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Among the most crucial reforms under these new laws are the focused provisions targeting mob lynching and cyber offenses, two modern crimes that have plagued India in recent years.

1. Understanding Mob Lynching Under the BNS: A New Legal Framework

a. The Rise of Mob Lynching in India

The issue of mob lynching has become a major concern in India over the last decade, with numerous incidents of public violence often sparked by allegations of cow slaughter, child lifting, or religious hatred. According to news reports from major dailies like The Indian Express and Hindustan Times, several high-profile cases have shocked the nation and raised calls for stronger laws to curb such acts.

In 2018, the Supreme Court itself recognized the gravity of the issue in the landmark case of Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India (2018). The Court condemned mob violence and issued guidelines for the protection of individuals, directing state governments to take preventive, punitive, and remedial measures against lynching incidents. However, despite these directives, mob lynching incidents continued, signaling the need for legislative intervention.

b. BNS Provisions on Mob Lynching

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) introduces a specific legal framework to address mob lynching, marking a departure from the IPC, which did not have any specific provisions dealing with this crime.

·        Section 103(2) of the BNS: Mob lynching has been defined and criminalized as an offense involving violence committed by a group with the intention to cause grievous harm or death to an individual or group, based on rumors or hatred. The section provides stringent punishments, including life imprisonment for those involved in mob lynching resulting in death.

·        Accountability of Bystanders: Under the BNS, not only are perpetrators held accountable, but also those who participate in the violence or fail to report such incidents. This is a notable improvement, as the legal system often failed to punish those who aided or abetted mob violence by inaction.

c. Recent Landmark Cases and Judicial Interpretation

Several recent judgments have reinforced the legal stance against mob lynching:

·        In Naseeruddin v. State of Jharkhand (2022), the Jharkhand High Court upheld the conviction of several accused who were part of a lynch mob that killed a man on suspicion of cow slaughter. The court observed that "lynching is a clear manifestation of societal failure to uphold the rule of law," urging for more stringent measures.

·        The Supreme Court's reiteration of its 2018 guidelines in Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India in subsequent PILs has emphasized the state's responsibility to control mob violence and provide compensation to victims’ families.

2. Cyber Offenses Under the BNS and BNSS: Addressing the Digital Age

a. The Growing Threat of Cybercrime in India

With the rise of the digital age, India has seen a dramatic increase in cyber offenses, including identity theft, online fraud, cyberbullying, and cyberterrorism. High-profile cyber-attacks and hacking incidents on both individuals and organizations have raised serious concerns about the inadequacies of the old legal system to address these new forms of crime.

·        According to reports from The Economic Times, cybercrimes in India rose by nearly 50% between 2019 and 2022, with most cases related to phishing scams, ransomware attacks, and digital fraud.

·        The government’s push towards digital transactions during the pandemic led to an increase in financial cyber fraud cases, necessitating a stronger legal framework to prosecute offenders.

b. BNS and BNSS Provisions on Cybercrime

Recognizing the changing nature of crime, both the BNS and BNSS introduce comprehensive provisions that criminalize a wide range of cyber offenses.

·        Section 113 of the BNS specifically deals with cyberterrorism, making it a punishable offense to carry out attacks on critical digital infrastructure or to use cyber technology to incite terror activities. The penalty for cyberterrorism under the BNS can extend to life imprisonment.

·        Section 337 of the BNS addresses identity theft and fraudulent digital transactions, criminalizing the use of fake identities and illegal access to personal information for unlawful gain. This section is designed to tackle the increasing incidents of online banking fraud and social media scams.

·        BNSS on Digital Evidence: The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) updates procedural laws to include digital evidence as admissible in court. The law explicitly allows for electronic documents, emails, and digital records to be submitted as proof, streamlining the investigation and prosecution of cyber offenses.

c. Landmark Cases on Cyber Offenses

In recent years, courts across India have dealt with significant cybercrime cases, establishing important legal precedents:

·        In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized offensive online speech. The Court held that the provision was too vague and violated freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). However, this judgment led to further calls for clear cyber legislation, which has now been addressed through the BNS and BNSS.

·        The Delhi High Court, in the case of Vijay Madan Lal v. State of Delhi (2021), dealt with cyber fraud involving fake e-commerce websites. The court upheld the conviction of the accused for identity theft and cheating, emphasizing that cyber fraud requires specific intent and can have devastating effects on individuals' lives and financial security.

·        National Investigation Agency v. Mohammad Ibrahim (2022), a case involving a cyber attack on critical infrastructure, was instrumental in the drafting of Section 113 of BNS, which was influenced by the Court’s observation that cyberterrorism should be treated with the same seriousness as conventional terrorism.

3. Challenges in Implementation and Lacunas

Despite the robust legal provisions under the BNS and BNSS, certain challenges and lacunas persist:

a. Vague Definitions and Overreach

Several legal experts have pointed out that certain definitions, particularly those relating to cyber offenses, are still too broad and may lead to misinterpretation or misuse. For example, the term "cyberterrorism" under Section 113 of the BNS may be subject to overreach by authorities, potentially criminalizing free speech or digital activism.

b. Implementation Bottlenecks

The success of the new laws depends heavily on technological infrastructure and training of law enforcement. Many states in India still lack the necessary cyber forensic tools and expertise, which can delay the investigation and prosecution of cybercrimes.

c. Public Trust and Awareness

While the legal framework has been updated, there is a lack of public awareness regarding digital safety and cybercrime reporting. Moreover, mob lynching victims and their families often face social and political pressure, which can undermine the effectiveness of legal provisions.

4. Public Interest Litigations and Societal Reactions

Several Public Interest Litigations (PILs) have been filed in the Supreme Court challenging certain provisions of the BNSS and BNS, particularly regarding police overreach in cybercrime investigations.

·        A recent PIL filed by the Internet Freedom Foundation questions the vague definitions of cyberterrorism under the BNS, arguing that it could be used to suppress dissent or criticism of the government.

·        Additionally, civil rights groups have raised concerns about the potential for misuse of the mob lynching provisions in politically sensitive cases, with protests erupting in several states demanding greater safeguards for the accused.

5. Judicial Opinions and Expert Views

Prominent legal scholars and judges have expressed mixed opinions on the new laws:

·        Justice Lokur, former Supreme Court judge, has praised the BNS provisions on mob lynching for addressing the growing trend of hate crimes, but he has also called for better safeguards against the misuse of cyber laws.

·        Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave has highlighted the importance of training the judiciary and law enforcement to deal with digital evidence, calling for more clarity in the procedural aspects of the BNSS.

Conclusion

The introduction of BNS and BNSS marks a significant step towards modernizing India's criminal justice system. By addressing mob lynching and cyber offenses directly, these laws attempt to bring the criminal code in line with the realities of the 21st century. However, the success of these reforms will depend on their implementation, judicial interpretation, and public understanding. Policymakers, judicial officers, and aspirants must navigate these new waters carefully to ensure justice while safeguarding against overreach.