New Delhi, April 4 (UNI): Home Minister Amit Shah on Monday said the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 will strengthen law and order, adding that the government is also formulating a ‘new model vision manual,’ which will cover the concerns raised over the proposed law.
Moving the Bill for debate in Lok Sabha, Shah said, “This will increase the rate of being able to prove a crime. As long as the ratio of proving crimes does not increase, establishing law and order and strengthening internal security is nearly impossible.”
“This is timely legislation, though it is already late. The Law Commission in its report in 1980 had recommended amending the criminal laws,” he added.
Shah said that consultations have been held with states and other stakeholders and international laws regarding identification of criminals have also been studied before framing the Bill. The present law authorises taking ‘measurement’ of a limited category of people and a proper definition is needed, he noted.
“When it was being introduced by Mr Mishra, many objections were raised, Supreme Court judgements were also quoted. Concerns were also expressed from the perspective of human rights, and freedom of an individual,” said Shah. “Their concerns are valid, but they have been taken care of in the law… In the leadership of Modiji, India is creating a new model vision manual, which we will send to the states. The vision manual will cover many concerns in this document,” added the Home Minister.
Trinamool Congress MP Saugata Roy said he has not seen the new manual yet. Shah replied that he hasn’t, as he is not a part of the government and the code is being formulated. Another Opposition MP quipped that Shah was angry on the question. The Home Minister, however, said, “I never get angry. Except when it is about the Kashmir issue, I never get angry.” The Bill was taken up for debate.
Opposition MPs from the DMK, Trinamool, Shiv Sena, and Congress, on Monday unanimously termed the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 as “draconian” and demanded that it be sent to a Standing Committee for further discussion.
