Delhi High Court Rejects PIL To Abolish Offences Of 'Waging War', 'Unlawful Assembly' From BNS 2023

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking abolition of offences of waging war against the State and unlawful assembly from the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal remarked that it cannot direct the Parliament to abolish the provisions as that will be amounting to legislation, which is not the realm of Courts.

The Court rejected the PIL filed by one Upendra Nath Dalai, seeking abolition of Section 147 (waging war against State), Section 158 (harbouring prisoners), Section 189 (unlawful assembly) and Section 197 (promoting enmity), which fall under Chapter VII and XI of BNS.

“Abolition is only permissible by enacting the amendment act. Its an act of the Palrimanet. We cannot direct the Parliament to do so, it will amount to legislating. It is not under our realm,” the Court remarked.

It said that the prayers made in thi PIL cannot be granted by the Court while exercising its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.

In his PIL, Dalai contended that the provisions in question are not in public interest and should be abolished. He submitted that the sections are anti democratic and violate the fundamental rights of citizens under Articles 21, 14 and 19 of the Constitution.

As per the plea, the intention of the Central Government is to “suppress the Indians” by imposing the impugned sections in the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita “like the British government in India before independence.”

Dalai contended that the “government wants no one to oppose it” and that whoever opposes the government and organizes a meeting, the government “knowingly” registers FIR against them for unlawful assembly offence.

The plea further states that by saying that opposing the government or opposing the work of the government is a threat to the integrity of the country, innocent citizens are being punished with the offence of sedition, which is an injustice.

“There is no king here. All citizens are kings. Here, according to the constitution, to provide order and justice to the citizens, the government is formed every five .years through elections. Therefore, opposing the government or holding protests and meetings against the government is logical,” the plea stated.

It added: “A country is a region of land and a group of people. So the government cannot be compared with the country. What is the difference between treason and sedition that petitioner described in his petition file. But Sad thing is that government of India replaced only name treason instead of sedition.”

Title: UPENDRA NATH DALAI v. UNION OF INDIA