'Important Issue' : Supreme Court Urges Madras High Court To Expeditiously Hear Pleas Challenging BNS, BNSS & BSA

The Supreme Court today requested the Madras High Court to give an expeditious hearing to writ petitions pending before it on the question of constitutional validity of 3 new criminal laws viz. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA).

"Having regard to the importance of the issue and the fact that writ petitions are awaiting effective hearing, we request Chief Justice of the High Court to place all matters before a Division Bench, with further request for early/out-of-turn hearing in the matters", it ordered.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi was dealing with a petition filed by a Federation of Bar Associations of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, seeking transfer of the cases from the High Court to the Supreme Court.

The transfer was sought on the ground that some petitions challenging validity of the new criminal laws were already pending before the top Court. Further, the bench was informed that notice in the underlying petitions was issued by the High Court on September 25, 2024, however, since then, no effective date of hearing had been fixed.

Considering that a High Court's view would be helpful, the Supreme Court bench impressed upon the petitioner to assist the High Court in the pending writ petitions, so it can have advantage of the High Court's opinion with respect to validity of the 3 central Acts.

Notably, during the hearing, the petitioner's side flagged the notification of the Delhi Lieutenant Governor designating all police stations in Delhi as places for police personnel to present evidence and depose before courts through video conferencing. In response, Justice Kant said, "what you're raising is a pure question of constitutional validity, pure question of law. The facts of any case will not be relevant".

Background

The Supreme Court is currently hearing a petition filed by the Mannargudi Bar Association challenging 4 provisions of the BNSS. These include: Sections 43(3) [Handcuffing], 107 [attachment, forfeiture of property], 223 [non-taking of cognizance in a complaint case without opportunity of hearing to accused] and 356 [trial in absence of accused].

The Court is also dealing with another petition, filed by one Azad Singh Kataria (a retired BSF Commandant), challenging certain provisions of BNS and BNSS. During a hearing of the same, it questioned as to whether there should be protective safeguards in place insofar as persons accused of organized crimes are concerned.

In September, 2024, the Supreme Court disposed of two petitions challenging the 3 new criminal laws, while reserving liberty for filing of more comprehensive, fresh petitions. The Court emphasized on the need for the issue to be addressed by the petitioners more appropriately and with extreme caution.

The Madras High Court, on its part, questioned in July 2024 the need for the Central government to repeal the erstwhile criminal laws (IPC, CrPC and the Evidence Act) when any proposed changes could have been incorporated by way of amendments to those Acts. While hearing 3 PILs challenging the constitutional validity of the 3 laws, a division bench orally remarked, "Why did you want to change everything? Was it to confuse the people? You could have made small amendments".

Appearance: Sr Adv S Prabhakaran, Senior Advocate P Wilson

Case Title: FEDERATION OF BAR ASSOCIATIONS OF TAMIL NADU AND PUDUCHERRY Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., T.P.(Crl.) No. 690-692/2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Also Read - One Year Of New Criminal Laws : Key Supreme Court Judgments On BNS, BNSS