These and other sections that lawyers have had at the tip of their tongue for decades have now been consigned to history, with the British-era IPC being replaced by BNS from Monday.
At the district court, lawyers pored over books and manuals to read the fine print of BNS, BNSS (which replaced CrPC) and BSA (to be used in place of the Indian Evidence Act) to get ready for arguments before judges from Tuesday.
The lawyers admitted they had their task cut out. Many of them demanded that workshops be organised to train them on how to draft a petition under the new sections, submit documents to support their plea and produce evidence along with it.
Manish Shandilya, a lawyer at the district court, was flipping through the pages of the new law book when TOI approached him. Still digging deep into the manual, he admitted that the next few days would be difficult and marked by confusion.
“We know the IPC sections like the back of our hand. But the BNS provisions will take time to memorise. For instance, when someone mentions murder, we are used to writing 302. But now, murder is Section 100 and cheating Section 318 under the new criminal laws,” he told TOI. “There should have been some workshop for lawyers on how to file for a bail or represent an accused in court.”
Shandilya feared that over the next few days, applications in court could be riddled with mistakes because lawyers are used to writing IPC sections and not the new provisions. “We have a number of bail applications scheduled to be filed for Tuesday. In the absence of any proper training, we have been asking each other while drafting a plea. But everyone seems to be equally confused,” he added.
The lawyer pointed out that though the new laws made video evidence mandatory, few knew how to go about it. “As of now, there is no clarity of how electronic evidence will be submitted along with the application. The judicial settlement system will remain unchanged, but since provisions have been modified, it will take time to streamline the entire process,” said Shandilya.
Rajiv Kaushik, his colleague at the district court, said learning the new provisions did not mean unlearning the IPC sections.
“Cases registered before July 1 will still be argued under the previous sections. But at the same time, the latest cases will involve the revised provisions. So, a lawyer with two sets of cases under different provisions on the same day may indeed find it challenging to argue in court,” he added.
Jagrup Singh of Adhiwakta Parishad — an association of lawyers — couldn’t agree more. “During arguments, it is common practice for lawyers to cite past orders of courts. We rely heavily on this. But will it still hold ground before a judge now? All past cases were under the old laws when investigation relied on documentary evidence, unlike now,” he added.
