Latest news with #UttarakhandStateAmendment
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
U'khand HC asks CJ to decide if BNSS overrides state's stricter CrPC amendment
Dehradun: A single-judge bench of the Uttarakhand high court referred a key legal conflict to the Chief Justice bench, asking whether section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which expanded anticipatory bail rights, could override the Uttarakhand State Amendment to section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, and apply retrospectively to cases filed before BNSS came into force. The order dated Aug 8, 2025, arose in Harish Kumar Prajapati v Central Bureau of Investigation, with anticipatory bail application no. 133 of 2025 treated as the lead matter. Justice Alok Kumar Verma heard a batch of anticipatory bail pleas and said, "Anticipatory bail is a safeguard against arbitrary arrest. It is a pre-emptive measure to protect personal liberty from false accusations or misuse of the law. Liberty is the very quintessence of a civilised existence." He added that BNSS continued to protect personal liberty and that the restrictions under section 438(6) of CrPC, as amended by Uttarakhand, appeared to be no longer in effect. He noted that the state had consciously avoided amending section 482 BNSS to restore those curbs. Disagreeing with an earlier coordinate bench that had rejected such appeals, he referred the issue to a larger bench headed by the chief justice. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 20 Things Women Should NEVER Wear! Undo State counsel argued that the anticipatory bail applications were not maintainable under the amended section 438 CrPC or section 531 BNSS. The court also noted that Uttarakhand had not amended section 482 of BNSS after the new code came into force. Applicant counsel countered that anticipatory bail was a substantive right, not just a procedural safeguard, and said, "In BNSS, there is no express bar prohibiting anticipatory bail for offences under IPC and other Acts, even if committed before its commencement. The law must protect, not restrict, the rights of the accused." He cited an Allahabad high court judgment that held section 482 BNSS would prevail over a state amendment. Recent rulings of Allahabad HC — on Jun 12–14 and Jul 4 — have held that with BNSS replacing CrPC from Jul 1, 2024, the earlier bar on anticipatory bail in serious offences under state amendments has been removed, as the omission of those restrictions in BNSS was deliberate. 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.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Uttarakhand HC refers conflict over anticipatory bail provisions to Chief Justice bench
Representative Image DEHRADUN: A single-justice bench of the Uttarakhand high court has referred the issue of whether section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 takes precedence over the Uttarakhand State Amendment under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to the bench presided by the Chief Justice. The referral addresses whether the provisions of BNSS, which benefit the accused, can be applied retrospectively to earlier cases regardless of when the case was initiated. After the other bench rejected the anticipatory bail appeals, they were heard by Justice Alok Verma bench, who stated that the provision of anticipatory bail is rooted in the fundamental right to personal liberty. Expressing disagreement with the view taken by the coordinate bench, Justice Verma said, "It is a pre-emptive measure to safeguard personal liberty against false accusation or misuse of the law. Anticipatory bail is a safeguard against arbitrary arrest. Liberty is the very quintessence of a civilized existence. The BNSS is also upholding the importance of protecting personal liberty. The restrictions on granting anticipatory bail under section 438(6) of the Code (as amended by the State of Uttarakhand) are no longer in effect. " The state counsels argued that the anticipatory bail applications are not maintainable under section 438 of CrPC as amended by the State of Uttarakhand and even in terms of section 531 of BNSS. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This is what he found in Paris after cleaning his canal, and believe me, you'll be surprised Daily Sport X Undo Per contra, counsel appearing for the applicants argued that these anticipatory bail applications are maintainable. He further said that the anticipatory bail is a substantive right, not merely a procedure. "In BNSS, there is no express bar prohibiting anticipatory bail for the offences under IPC and other Acts, even if committed before the commencement of BNSS. It must be read in a manner that protects rather than restricts the rights of the accused," the counsel said. He also cited a case of Allahabad HC in which it was held that the provisions of section 482 of BNSS would prevail over the state amendment. "When the Parliament enacts more liberal provisions, the benefit thereof should be available to all persons who may be affected, regardless of when their cases originated. Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the accused is entitled to the benefit of the more liberal provisions introduced by BNSS," Justice Verma said and referred the case to the Chief Justice. 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.
