Live
- Techies demand implementation of labour laws in IT companies
- Modi-Shah-Nadda trio to bring zing to BJP electioneering
- Public urged to exercise their right to vote without fear
- Foreign policy navigates a new flux
- PM Modi indulges in fear mongering: Congress
- Committed voters vs wavering voters !
- Indian Ambassador to Japan commends Sri City's investment potential
- Bhagwat trashes viral clip, says RSS backs quota
- India made progress on multiple fronts under PM Modi: Eatala
- BJP alleges TS Cong tampered with audio speech of HM Shah
Avoid handcuffs for economic offenders
Don’t treat them like rapists or murderers: Parl panel
The Reason
Economic offences encompasses a wide range of offences -- from petty to serious -- and therefore, it may not be suitable for blanket application of handcuffing in all cases falling under this category
New Delhi: People taken into custody for economic offences should not be handcuffed and clubbed with those arrested for heinous crimes such as rape and murder, a parliamentary committee has recommended.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, headed by BJP MP Brijlal, also recommended changes to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) on the issue of police custody of an accused beyond the first 15 days from arrest.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS-2023) bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11 along with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS-2023) and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA-2023) bills.
The three proposed laws seek to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1898, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively. The parliamentary panel noted that it felt the use of handcuffs, as outlined in Clause 43(3) of the BNSS, is appropriately restricted to select heinous crimes to prevent escape of individuals accused of serious offences and ensure safety of police officers and staffers during arrests.
However, the committee is of the view that "economic offences" should not be included in this category. This is because the term "economic offences" encompasses a wide range of offences -- from petty to serious -- and therefore, it may not be suitable for blanket application of handcuffing in all cases falling under this category. "The committee, therefore, recommends that Clause 43(3) may be suitably amended to delete the words 'economic offences' from the clause," the panel said.
