We all saw and were heartbroken
by what happened at Pahelgam, Kashmir recently.
Our blood boils when we saw terrorist targeting unarmed tourist and
civilians and killing them by asking them their religion. Our brothers were
brutally killed before their wives; children were made to watch their father
being killed and traumatised family members were spared to suffer throughout
their lives.
We all know that this was
terrorist attack on Indian soil, but this very statement raises the question as
to ‘what’ and ‘who’ exactly is a terrorist? Is it only the person who committed
the offence or is his masters also terrorists or what about those locals who
helped him in this act of pure evil?
Today we are going to discuss the
newly added offence of terrorism in Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as well as other
acts and laws that discusses terrorism in Indian Laws.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),
2023, has introduced several provisions aimed at strengthening India's legal
framework. Among these, Section 113 deals with the offence of
terrorist acts, outlining the definition, scope, and penalties associated
with such crimes.
What Constitutes a Terrorist Act?
Under Section 113, a
person is said to commit a terrorist act if they engage in activities that:
- Threaten or likely to threaten the unity,
integrity, sovereignty, or security of India. This “likely to
threaten” means that this offence is punishable even at the stage of
preparation also. Hence every body that is involved in such an offence at
the time of preparation which include planning and execution of the
offence such as the person who locates spot for the offence, who brings in
arms and ammunition, who brings in monetary resources as well as people
who shelter such perpetrators of terrorism, all are equally liable for the
act of terrorism as the ones who actually execute it.
- To Intimidate the general public or disrupt
public order. The provision describes it as striking terror in the people
or section of people.
- In India or in any foreign country. Hence our
law does not discriminate between terrorist acts that happen on our soil
and that happen abroad, unlike that of our neighbouring countries like
Pakistan, that are also known as the topmost quality manufacturer of
terrorist which are exported around the globe. For them, the pigs who strike terror in
India and abroad are revolutionaries whereas the ones who blow themselves
up in their own country are terrorist/ pigs with manufacturing defect.
- By Use explosives, firearms, poison, or hazardous
substances to cause harm. Use of bombs dynamite or other explosive
substances/ firearms/ lethal weapons/ poisonous or noxious gases/
chemicals/ biological substances/ radioactive substances/ nuclear
substances are covered in addition to other substances of hazardous
nature.
- Damage critical infrastructure or disrupt
essential services/ cause death or injury to persons/ disruption of
essential supplies are covered as terrorist acts.
- Damage to monetary stability by way of
production/ smuggling/ circulation of counterfeit Indian paper currency,
coin is also included in definition of terrorism.
- By means of Criminal Force causing death/
kidnaping or abduction of any person
- To Influence government actions through
intimidation or violence.
Punishments Under Section 113
The penalties for committing a
terrorist act are severe:
- If the act results in death it shall be punishable
by death or life imprisonment without parole, along with a fine of
at least Rs.10 lakh.
- For other offences it shall be punishable with
minimum five years imprisonment, extendable to life imprisonment,
with a fine of at least Rs.5 lakh.
- Conspiring or assisting in terrorist activities
shall be punishable with Minimum five years imprisonment,
extendable to life imprisonment, with a fine of at least Rs. 5
lakhs.
- Membership in a terrorist organization in punishable
with life imprisonment and a fine of at least ₹5 lakh.
Significance of Section 113
- This provision strengthens India's ability to combat
terrorism by:
·
Providing clear definitions of terrorist
acts as earlier Indian Penal code, which was the main penal statute did not
define terrorism, rather in case of a terrorist act, specific acts were
individually punishable by the statute. There were definitions of terrorism in
other acts like Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) 1967, which Defines
terrorist acts and terrorist organizations and allows the government to ban
organizations involved in terrorism. It also provides for preventive detention
and strict bail provisions; National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, 2008,
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 which targets terror
financing by monitoring suspicious financial transactions; The Information
Technology (IT) Act, 2000 which covers cyberterrorism, including hacking
and digital threats to national security; The Explosive Substances Act, 1908
Which deals with the illegal use of explosives for terrorist activities.
- Ensuring strict punishments to deter such
crimes.
- Enhancing national security by targeting
individuals and organizations involved in terrorism.
- Section 113 of the BNS is a crucial step in India's
fight against terrorism, ensuring that those who threaten the nation's
security face stringent legal consequences.
Some Case Studies on Section 113 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
To understand the application of Section
113 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), I have included some key
case studies that have shaped India's approach to tackling terrorism.
1. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994)
- In this case the constitutional validity of the
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1987 was
challenged on the following grounds:
Violation
of Fundamental Rights
- Petitioners argued that TADA violated Article 14
(Right to Equality) by creating special courts with different
procedures. It was claimed that the act imposed unreasonable
restrictions on Article 19 (Freedom of Speech and Expression). Article
21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) was allegedly compromised due
to provisions allowing prolonged detention without bail.
Admissibility
of Confessions to Police
- Section 15 of TADA allowed confessions made to police
officers to be admissible in court, which was argued to be against principles
of fair trial.
- Critics claimed this provision could lead to coerced
confessions and misuse by law enforcement.
Denial of
Bail and Preventive Detention
- Section 20 of TADA imposed strict bail conditions,
making it nearly impossible for accused persons to secure bail. Hence the
petitioners argued that this violated personal liberty and due process.
Legislative
Competence
- It was contended that TADA exceeded the legislative
powers of the central government, as public order was a state subject
under the Constitution.
Speedy
Trial Concerns
- The act allowed for prolonged detention without trial
which was argued to violate the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.
- Despite these challenges, the Supreme Court upheld
the validity of TADA, but emphasized the need for judicial safeguards to
prevent misuse. The judgment played a crucial role in shaping future
anti-terror laws in India.
- The ruling highlighted the balance between national
security and individual rights, influencing the drafting of Section 113 in
BNS.
2. People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2003)
- This case questioned the detention provisions
under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), 2002.
- The Supreme Court ruled that while the state has the
power to curb terrorism, it must do so within constitutional limits.
- The judgment reinforced the need for checks and
balances, which are now reflected in Section 113.
3. Mohammed Ajmal Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012)
- Ajmal Kasab, one of the 26/11 Mumbai attack
perpetrators, was prosecuted under various anti-terror laws.
- The court ruled that acts of terrorism threaten
national sovereignty and warrant the severest punishments.
- This case demonstrated the importance of strong legal frameworks, influencing the provisions of Section 113.
Conclusion:
Including terrorism in Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita and comprehensively defining it is a welcome move by the
lawmakers of India. It can be seen that the present Section 113 of BNS builds
upon past anti-terror laws like TADA and POTA which have become redundant in
present times. While the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) serves as
the primary anti-terrorism law in India, inclusion of terrorism as an offence
in the primary penal code of India (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) with deterrence
inducing punishments and broad but yet specific definitions is a subject to be
praised.
With the inclusion of Section
113, all forms of terrorism have found a common definition because of which the
trial of such terrorists shall become easier, at least in theory. We are yet to
see the impact of this provision on ground and in practice.
This provision has components and
a comprehensive legal framework to address modern day terrorist threats such as
biological, cyberterrorism and cross border terrorism including insurgencies
from our beloved neighbour which we call Pakistan. (at least for now, may get
split in future, hope it does)
In the end, I would like to end
with passing my condolences for all the families that have faced any kind of
terror attack in past or in present Pahelgam attack, hopefully never in future.
Jai Hind! Bharat Mata Ki Jai!
____________________________________________________________
Sources/ References :
Mohammed Ajmal Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012)
___________________________________________________________________
Related Blogs:
Combatting Organized Crime: A Comprehensive Guide to Section 111 of BNS
Legal Insights on Section 113: Terrorism Offence Unveiled
1.
Navigating The Hierarchy: Decoding Delhi Police Officer Ranks
___________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer:
This Article/essay provides general information and does not constitute legal
advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific cases.
Tip: If
you find this Article to be of any relevance, please feel free to give your
feedback to the author via commenting below. Consider following my blog. For
any query or suggestions, you can email the author at support@legalprobe.in
0 Comments