Petition filed in Madras HC against implementation of three new criminal laws in Hindi, Sanskrit

CHENNAI: Naming the new criminal laws in Hindi and Sanskrit will not affect the fundamental rights and it is the wisdom of the elected Parliament, submitted the Union government before the Madras High Court in a petition challenging the nomenclature of the new criminal laws.

The first division bench of acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq heard the public interest litigation (PIL) moved by Ramkumar Aditiyan of AIADMK seeking to direct the Union government to provide nomenclature in English to the new criminal laws.

The petitioner submitted in his petition that despite Hindi is not being the mother tongue of 56.37 percent of Indians, however the Union ministry of law and Cabinet secretary have given names in Hindi and Sanskrit to the new laws as Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Act replacing the Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Indian Evidence Act respectively.

The nomenclature in Hindi and Sanskrit languages for these legislations would create confusion, ambiguity and difficulty for the non-Hindi and non-Sanskrit speakers, moreover, the names provided for these Acts are hard to pronounce, said the petitioner.

Therefore, the titles in Hindi and Sanskrit Languages of the above mentioned three Acts violates the fundamental right, freedom to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business enshrined under the Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution to the non-Hindi and non-Sanskrit speaking law teachers, advocates, law officers and judicial officers, said the petitioner.

The petitioner also submitted that the enactment of three criminal laws also violates Article 348 of the Constitution.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) ARL Sundaresan representing the Union government submitted that English alphabets are used in the nomenclature of Hindi names for the new criminal laws.

The ASG also submitted that by the passage of time the names of the new criminal laws get used to us and it is not affecting any fundamental rights. Since the new laws are the wisdom of the Parliament elected by the people of India, Article 348 is not violated as claimed by the petitioner, submitted the ASG.

The ASG also submitted that the interim injunction seeking the petitioner to restrain the Union government from implementing the new criminal laws are out of the scope of the main plea.

After the submission the bench dismissed the interim injunction sought by the petitioner. Further the matter was posted to July 23 for the Union government's counter.