State cabinet clears draft bill to decriminalise minor offences in 11 laws
Gandhinagar: The Gujarat cabinet on Wednesday approved the draft of the Gujarat Jan Viswas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill, 2025, which seeks to decriminalise provisions under 11 state laws.
The bill proposes replacing jail terms with monetary penalties for minor compliance lapses across industries and businesses.
The legislation will be tabled in the upcoming assembly session in the second week of Sep. According to an official release, the move aims to simplify and rationalise business compliances, thereby improving Gujarat's rankings in Ease of Doing Business and Ease of Living.
You Can Also Check:
Ahmedabad AQI
|
Weather in Ahmedabad
|
Bank Holidays in Ahmedabad
|
Public Holidays in Ahmedabad
|
Gold Rates Today in Ahmedabad
|
Silver Rates Today in Ahmedabad
The govt's statement of objectives notes that imprisonment for minor offences often hampers business growth and undermines individual confidence.
"Reducing the compliance burden gives impetus to business process re-engineering and eases the lives of people. The government is committed to measures such as simplifying, digitising, and rationalising compliances," it states.
It further adds, "The fear of imprisonment for minor offences is a major factor hampering the growth of the business ecosystem and individual confidence. The govt is therefore considering decriminalisation of a number of minor offences by replacing them with monetary penalties.
By making such measures, the govt is striving to make lives and businesses easier while also reducing the burden on courts."
Currently, several state laws — including the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, the Shops and Establishment Act, and the Labour Welfare Fund Act — prescribe imprisonment for minor violations. "For instance, an employer could face jail for small offences under the Labour Welfare Act.
The new bill will end the threat of imprisonment for such cases," a senior govt official said.
The draft bill covers a wide range of legislations, including the Gujarat Industrial Development Act (1962), Labour Welfare Fund Act (1953), Municipalities Act (1963), APMC Act, Domestic Water Supply Act, Cooperative Societies Act, Town Planning Act, Shops and Establishment Act, and the Electricity Duty Act.
Officials said the comprehensive reform is expected to reduce litigation, streamline compliance, and encourage business activity, while shifting enforcement from criminalisation to regulation through penalties.
Stay updated with the latest local news from your
city
on
Times of India
(TOI). Check upcoming
bank holidays
,
public holidays
, and current
gold rates
and
silver prices
in your area.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
11 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Anti-defection law and Supreme Court's order for Telangana speaker: When the custodian refuses to act
Written by Shashank Maheshwari and Anmol Jain 'The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy.' These words from the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Constitution (Fifty-Second Amendment) Bill, 1985, capture the spirit of the Tenth Schedule. Yet, four decades on, the anti-defection law is being weakened and bypassed not only by defections and resignations but also by omissions by the Speakers — the constitutional authority responsible for deciding anti-defection petitions. The Supreme Court's ruling in Padi Kaushik Reddy v. State of Telangana (2025) exemplifies this challenge. The case came up after three Bharat Rashtra Samithi MLAs defected to the ruling Congress in 2024. Petitions seeking their disqualification were filed before the Speaker of the Telangana Assembly, who kept them pending, allegedly for political reasons. A single judge bench of the High Court directed the Assembly Secretary to place the petitions before the Speaker and ensure a hearing schedule. Disagreeing, the division bench quashed the order, holding — contrary to the prevailing Indian jurisprudence — that courts cannot fix timelines for the Speaker under the Tenth Schedule. By the time the matter reached the Supreme Court, significant time had passed. This very fear of delay was foreseen during the parliamentary debates of 1985. Parliament chose to vest decision-making power in the Speaker, not the Courts or the Election Commission, to ensure the swift disposal of petitions. The worry was that judicial procedures would consume time and deny rightful representation to the electorate. Yet, no statutory limits were set on the Speaker's discretion, perhaps because the law's immediate purpose — when it was introduced — was to prevent the elected members of the Congress party from defecting to the opposition, a pattern that gave a blow to Congress in several states. Even so, Congress leader Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi had cautioned: 'Now, in regard to a dispute regarding a member, the matter will be referred to the Presiding Officer, but no time limit has been fixed. I would request that in the next session, the time limit be fixed within which the Speaker has to announce his decision. If he keeps it pending for three to four months, it should not be allowed.' His words now seem to be prophetic. Across the country, Speakers have used inaction to shield defectors, hollowing out the law itself. In Padi Kaushik Reddy, the SC revisited its precedents. Referring to Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), it reiterated that while the Speaker's procedural role and actions are immune from judicial review under Articles 122 and 212 of the Constitution, decisions on disqualification petitions are judicial in nature and subject to review on limited grounds such as mala fides, perversity, or jurisdictional error. Relying on Rajendra Singh Rana & Ors v. Swami Prasad Maurya & Ors (2007), the Court stressed that failure to exercise jurisdiction cannot excuse inaction. In the above-mentioned case, given excessive delay and the impending dissolution of the Assembly, the Court directly decided disqualification without remanding the matter back to the Speaker. Similarly, in Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020), the Court had imposed a four-week limit for deciding petitions, recognising that delay itself defeats the law. The Court also observed that Speakers should normally conclude matters within three months. Against this backdrop, paragraphs 93 to 95 of the Padi Kaushik judgment are telling. The Court reaffirmed that while it cannot mechanically dictate timelines, indefinite silence renders the Tenth Schedule meaningless. The Speaker is under a constitutional duty to act within a reasonable time. Where this duty is breached, judicial review may not prescribe rigid deadlines but can intervene to ensure that the law's very purpose of curbing defections is not frustrated. The judgment lays bare the core dilemma. The Tenth Schedule vests power in the Speaker on the assumption that constitutional morality will guide him. But as the 1985 debates and repeated judicial interventions reveal, this assumption has not held. The Speaker's inaction, warned against four decades ago by parliamentarians like Dasmunsi, remains the law's Achilles' heel. The Supreme Court has once again underlined the problem, while exercising restraint so as not to encroach upon the legislature's domain. Unless parliament amends the law to fix a clear timeline or shifts adjudication to an independent authority, the anti-defection regime will continue to be hollowed out by seemingly partisan Speakers. The 'evil of political defections' that the framers sought to eradicate thus survives — not because the law is absent, but because its custodian refuses to act. The writers teach law at Jindal Global Law School
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
China can pull back 150 km and come back in 2–3 hours: Indian Army officer suggests continued vigil along LAC
Even though there has been some positive movement in the Indo-China relations , Indian military planners are expected to remain on high alert on the ground even if a long-term de-escalation process with China begins in the coming months. 'The way China has built roads, bridges, tunnels and habitats along the entire LAC, from eastern Ladakh to Arunachal, over the last five years, PLA troops can easily afford to pull back 100–150 km and then come back again in 2–3 hours,' a senior Army officer told TOI. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) has reportedly built extensive infrastructure along the LAC, enabling rapid redeployment to forward areas if required. PLA retains rapid mobilisation capability While some of the PLA's combined arms brigades (CABs) have pulled back approximately 100 km in recent months, many still remain forward deployed. These brigades are equipped with tanks, armoured vehicles, artillery, and surface-to-air missile systems. Each CAB consists of around 4,500 to 5,000 troops. In contrast, Indian forces do not possess the same mobilisation flexibility, which introduces a significant time gap in force readiness along the LAC. 'There is a huge time differential in mobilisation between the rival forces that will have to be factored in during any de-escalation talks,' the officer told TOI. Live Events Also Read: India tests Agni-5 missile with 5,000 km range: Here's all about the nuclear-capable missile that can cover Turkey to China Trust deficit persists despite stabilisation So far, India and China have only agreed to 'discuss de-escalation, beginning with the principles and modalities thereof.' This understanding was reached during Wang Yi's recent visit. On the ground, although the situation has stabilised since troop disengagement at Depsang and Demchok in October last year, the trust deficit between the two armies remains considerable. Both sides continue to be forward deployed along the 3,488-km-long LAC with heavy military assets. 'There is no disruption in the coordinated patrolling by the rival soldiers there. But we cannot let our guard down since there has been no let-up in the PLA's military preparedness and infrastructure build-up,' another senior Army officer said to TOI. New mechanisms to strengthen border management In order to support stability along the LAC, both countries are expanding their diplomatic and military border management mechanisms. Existing talks between the Indian 14 Corps commander and China's South Xinjiang Military District chief in Ladakh will now be complemented by 'general-level mechanisms' in the eastern (Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh) and middle (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) sectors as reported by TOI. From the Indian side, the middle sector is likely to involve the Lt-General commanding the Uttar Bharat Area based in Bareilly, which has been 'combatised.' In the eastern sector, the Dimapur-based 3 Corps or Tezpur-based 4 Corps are expected to be involved in the new structure. Patrolling rights restoration a key objective In eastern Ladakh, a key priority for India remains the restoration of patrolling rights in areas where 'no-patrol buffer zones' were established during previous disengagement rounds up to September 2022. These buffer zones, ranging from 3 km to 10 km, were created at Galwan, the north bank of Pangong Tso, the Kailash Range, and the larger Gogra-Hot Springs area. Initially framed as 'temporary moratoriums,' there has been no progress in lifting these restrictions, despite these areas being considered by India as part of its own territory. India-China to resume border trade These comments follow the recent decision to reopen border trade through three designated trading points: Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand, Shipki La Pass in Himachal Pradesh, and Nathu La Pass in Sikkim. This development occurred during Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's visit to India earlier this week.
The Hindu
41 minutes ago
- The Hindu
DMK to oppose Bills moved for removal of arrested PM, CMs, Ministers: T.N. CM Stalin
The BJP-led Union government is introducing legislations in Parliament, such as the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, only to divert people's attention, and the DMK will oppose these 'black Bills,' Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin said on Thursday (August 21, 2025). Mr. Stalin was referring to the Bills that seek to remove from office any Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Union Minister, or Minister arrested and detained in custody for 30 days. The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and The Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025, were moved by Union Home Minister Amit Shah in Parliament on Wednesday (August 20). 'Earlier, they [BJP] brought in various legislations against the minorities, such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The same way that the DMK strongly opposed those legislations, we would oppose these black Bills,' Mr. Stalin said, while addressing an event in Kalaignar Arangam on Anna Salai in Chennai. Mr. Stalin further said: 'Why are they doing this? They are doing this only to divert the attention of the people. Not just that; they are doing this to divert the country from the path of democracy.' The DMK government would always stand by the minorities, he added. Mr. Stalin said: 'The DMK is for you. It would always stand by you, especially the minorities.' At the event, the Chief Minister released books authored by late former Minister A. Rahman Khan — namely, Niyayangalin Payanam, Mounamai Urangum Panithuligal, Ulagamariya Tajmahalgal, Poo.. Pookkum Ilaiyuthir Kaalam, and Vaanam Paarkatha Natchathirangal. He also released a compilation of the former Minister's speeches in the Assembly. IUML leader K.M. Kader Mohideen received the first copies of these books. Mr. Stalin also appreciated the late former Minister's son Zubair Khan for bringing out the publications. He recalled the long association of former Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi with Rahman Khan. 'M.G.R. repeatedly invited Rahman Khan to join his party, but he was steadfast in his principles. Bombs were hurled at his house not once but twice. This did not deter him. One time, they threatened him in his house with a machete. Rahman Khan muzzled the man who hurled a dagger at him,' Mr. Stalin said. In his speech, Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin referred to some of the thoughts of Rahman Khan and further said: 'Today, some slaves in Tamil Nadu politics are fearing the fascists.' Quoting a haiku penned by the former Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister further said: 'Some slaves are doing in Delhi what even puppets won't do.'
