Context: Formed in 1862, the Indian Penal Code completes 160 years of its existence. One of the prominent remains of the British era, IPC has been a part of Indian society. But has it served society according to its needs? Or does it still have a colonial hangover? More important… has it been able to keep pace with the changing face of crime.  The show looks back at the journey of Indian Penal Code and discusses the possibilities of reforms.
About IPC

• The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the official criminal code of India.
• It is a comprehensive code intended to cover all substantive aspects of criminal law.
• The code was drafted in 1860 on the recommendations of first law commission of India established in 1834 under the Charter Act of 1833 under the chairmanship of Macaulay.
• It came into force in British India during the early British Raj period in 1862.
• However, it did not apply automatically in the Princely states, which had their own courts and legal systems until the 1940s.
• The Code has since been amended several times and is now supplemented by other criminal provisions.

Why IPC needs revamp?

• The rebooting of IPC introduced by the British in 1860 was necessary as it is primarily based on the spirit of “master and servant.”
• In the British era, the police were raised to protect their interests, but now their duty is to “protect the people”.
• There is uneven punishment for crimes of grievous nature. For example — snatching of chains or bags on road. It could be life-threatening in some cases but the punishment is not commensurate with the gravity of the crime.
• Depending on the whims of the police, it is booked under robbery or theft. We have to standardize the punishment.

Earlier amendments

In 2016, the Home Ministry had proposed insertion of two stricter anti-racial discrimination provisions in the IPC.

• The two amendments — Section 153A and Section 509A “to deal with racially motivated crimes” received lukewarm response from the States.

The nature of the Indian Penal Code has been highlighted as that one of ‘Master and Servant’, with some of the provisions having no place in Independent India. Some of the sections that need reform and review are as follows:

• A re-examination of the sedition law, inserted in 1898, is necessary.
• The offence of blasphemy should have no place in a liberal democracy and, therefore, there is a need to repeal Section 295A, which was inserted in 1927.
• A criminal conspiracy was made a substantive offence in 1913. The offence is objectionable because it was added to the code by the colonial authorities to deal with political conspiracies.
• Under Section 149 on unlawful assembly, the principle of constructive liability is pushed to unduly harsh lengths.
• Sexual offences under the code reveal patriarchal values and outdated Victorian morality. Though the outmoded crime of adultery gives the husband sole proprietary rights over his wife’s sexuality, it gives no legal protection to secure a similar monopoly over the husband’s sexuality.