Bengal governor returns bill proposing death penalty for rape convicts to state for reconsideration
One of the proposed amendments seeks to increase the punishment for rape under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita from the current minimum 10-year imprisonment to life imprisonment or death penalty.
The Ministry of Home Affairs has said that the change is ' excessively harsh and disproportionate', The Indian Express quoted an unidentified Raj Bhawan official as saying.
Additionally, the bill proposes making the death penalty mandatory in cases involving the victim's death or persistent vegetative state under Section 66 of the BNS.
'The ministry has raised concerns over the removal of judicial discretion in such cases,' The Indian Express quoted the official as saying.
The state government has not commented on the matter so far.
The West Bengal Assembly had unanimously passed the Aparajita Women and Child West Bengal Criminal Laws Amendment Bill in September 2024.
The state government had said that the legislation was aimed at creating a ' safer environment for women and children ' by ensuring more stringent punishments for rape and related crimes.
The bill sought to amend sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita pertaining to punishments for acid attacks, rape, rape and murder, gangrape, repeat sex offenders and the disclosure of a rape victim's identity. It also seeks to do away with the concessions granted to juvenile sex offenders under the law.
It proposes the death penalty for rape convicts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Kerala govt moves SC seeking rejection of Presidential reference, calls it 'misuse of power'
"A reference under Article 143 cannot be used to overrule findings of law and fact in earlier judgments," the Kerala government stated. It further pointed out that the Union government has not filed any review or curative petition against the April 8 ruling, making it binding under Article 141. "The President and the council of ministers must act in aid of the Supreme Court under Article 144," the plea added. The state also accused the reference of misinterpreting Article 200 by falsely claiming that no timeline exists for governors to act on Bills. "The foundational issues in queries 1 to 11 have already been settled in the Tamil Nadu, Punjab, and Telangana cases," Kerala argued, urging the court to reject the reference as "misleading." The Supreme Court, meanwhile, has agreed to examine the Presidential reference and has sought responses from the Centre and all states by July 29. A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai, will hear the matter on August 29, with the assistance of Attorney General R Venkataramani. The court will determine whether judicially enforceable timelines can be imposed on Governors and the President regarding pending Bills. The controversy stems from the April 8 ruling by a two-judge bench, which held that Governors must act within three months if withholding assent to a bill and within one month if a bill is re-enacted. The court had invoked Article 142 to declare Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi's inaction as "illegal" and deemed 10 pending Bills as approved. President Murmu's reference challenges this verdict, raising questions on whether Governors are bound by ministerial advice and if their discretion under Article 200 is subject to judicial review. With Kerala now accusing the reference of being a "backdoor attempt" to undo settled law, the Supreme Court's upcoming decision could have far-reaching implications on Centre-state relations and the powers of constitutional authorities. Out of 14 crucial questions, the majority and important were as follows: 1) What are the constitutional options before a Governor when a Bill is presented under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 2) Is the Governor bound by the aid & advice tendered by the Council of Ministers while exercising all options available with him when a Bill is presented before him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 3) Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justiciable? 4) Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to the judicial review in relation to the actions of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 5) In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of all powers under Article 200 of the Constitution of India by the Governor?
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Maunvrat, maunvrat': How Shashi Tharoor deflected a question on Operation Sindoor; watch video
Shashi Tharoor (PTI photo) NEW DELHI: Senior Congress leader and MP Shashi Tharoor avoided media questions on Operation Sindoor on Monday, responding with just one word -- "Maunvrat, Maunvrat" -- as he entered Parliament, signalling his refusal to comment. His reaction came ahead of a scheduled 16-hour-long Lok Sabha debate on Operation Sindoor, as announced by the parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju . Tharoor's silence carries weight. The Thiruvananthapuram MP was selected by the BJP-led Centre to represent India's position on terrorism and counterterrorism in the aftermath of the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack , which killed 26 people. Under Operation Sindoor, launched on May 7, India struck key terror camps in Pakistan. Tharoor led the diplomatic delegation to the United States and several countries across the Americas to garner international support. However, Tharoor's strong backing of the government's stance sparked friction within the Congress party . His public alignment with Operation Sindoor led to internal criticism and pushback from the party high command, further intensified by his cryptic social media posts seen as indirect jabs. Now, questions linger over whether the Congress will allow Tharoor to speak in today's debate. His outspoken endorsement of the Centre's action post-Pahalgam has deepened the rift with party leadership, casting uncertainty on his role in the discussion.
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Maharashtra School Watchman Arrested For 'Sexually Abuse' Of 2 Students
Palghar: Police have arrested a 53-year-old security guard of a private school in Maharashtra's Palghar district for allegedly sexually abusing two male students, officials said. The alleged incidents occurred between June 15 and 20, the officials said on Sunday. The victims, aged 17 and 15, are students of the same school located in Virar area. "The alleged incidents occurred in the canteen of the school," the Arnala police stated. The accused was arrested on Saturday evening, the police said. "After receiving a complaint from the school's manager, we registered an FIR against the watchman, Raymond Wilson Dias, under section 75 (sexual harassment) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and sections 5, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act," the Arnala police station official said. Sections 5 of the POCSO Act pertains to penetrative sexual assault. In August 2024, a male sweeper at a school in Badlapur in neighbouring Thane district allegedly sexually abused two four-year-old girls, causing a huge outrage and massive protests. The accused was killed in September last year in the 'retaliatory firing' by police after he allegedly snatched the gun from a policeman in a police vehicle.
