New Provision of Mob Lynching in BNS, 2023: Explained

Mob Lynching in BNS

The BNS directly addresses the issue of mob lynching through the introduction of Section 103(2), which specifically deals with murder committed by a group of five or more people based on specific prejudices. 

Section 103(2) Mob Lynching in BNS

Section 103(2): When a group of five or more persons acting in concert commits murder on the ground of race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language, personal belief or any other similar ground each member of such group shall be punished with death or with imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 103(2): Mob Lynching in BNS : Explained

• Targeted Offences: This section specifically targets murder committed by a mob.
• Group Size: It applies when a group of five or more individuals act together.
• Motivating Factors: The murder must be committed based on discriminatory grounds, including:
  • Race
  • Caste
  • Community
  • Sex
  • Place of Birth
  • Language
  • Personal Belief
  • Any other similar ground: This broad language aims to encompass any form of prejudice or bias that may motivate a mob to commit murder.
• Punishments: This section introduces severe punishments, highlighting the gravity of mob lynching:
  • Death Penalty
  • Life Imprisonment (defined as the remainder of the person’s natural life)
  • Fine

Analysis:

This new provision creates a distinct category for mob lynching within the broader offence of murder. It recognizes that killings motivated by prejudice and carried out by a mob pose unique threats to society and warrant harsher punishments. This section seeks to deter such violence by emphasizing the collective accountability of each member of the mob.

Comparison with the IPC:

The IPC lacked a specific provision for mob lynching. Prosecutions often relied on general provisions related to murder, rioting, and unlawful assembly. This often led to challenges in securing convictions and imposing appropriate punishments.

Additional Insights:

It’s worth noting that the BNS retains and strengthens provisions related to unlawful assembly and rioting, which can be applied in conjunction with Section 103(2) in cases of mob lynching:

• Unlawful Assembly (Section 189): This section defines an unlawful assembly and outlines various situations where an assembly becomes unlawful. For example, an assembly becomes unlawful if its common object is to commit an offense, resist the execution of any law, or overawe the government or public servants.
• Rioting (Section 191): This section defines rioting as the use of force or violence by an unlawful assembly or its members. It sets forth punishments for those found guilty of rioting.
• Liability of Land Owners (Section 193): This section holds landowners accountable if an unlawful assembly or riot occurs on their property. It mandates fines if the owner or their representatives fail to take reasonable steps to prevent or suppress such gatherings.

The BNS also includes provisions regarding offenses that often precede or are associated with mob lynching, such as:

• Promoting Enmity (Section 196): This section addresses acts that promote hatred or disharmony between different groups based on religion, race, or other grounds. It aims to prevent the spread of divisive ideologies that often fuel mob violence.

READ MORE: Section 61 Criminal conspiracy under The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita

Section 109 Attempt to Murder of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): Explained

Historical Context and Evolution

Mob lynching has a long and distressing history in India, often rooted in deep-seated social prejudices. Over the last decade, India has witnessed a surge in mob violence, especially incidents targeting marginalized communities and individuals based on allegations such as cow slaughter, theft, or inter-community relationships. Notable cases include:

• Dadri Lynching (2015): Mohammad Akhlaq was brutally killed by a mob over allegations of consuming beef.
• Jharkhand Mob Lynching (2019): Tabrez Ansari was beaten to death by a mob, highlighting the rising trend of communal violence.

These incidents underscored the urgent need for specific legislation, as existing provisions under the IPC often fell short in addressing the complexities of mob lynching, especially when motivated by deep-rooted biases.

Comparison with Other Countries laws 

Examining how other countries tackle mob lynching and hate crimes provides valuable insights:

• United States: Hate crimes are prosecuted under federal and state laws, with enhanced penalties if the crime is motivated by race, religion, or other forms of prejudice. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (2009) is a notable example.
• South Africa: Their legal framework addresses public violence stemming from racial tensions and historical injustices, ensuring severe penalties for group-based violence.

Such comparisons highlight that India’s Section 103(2) aligns with international best practices, emphasizing the need to address crimes stemming from prejudice and collective violence with targeted legal provisions.

Constitutional Perspectives

Section 103(2) aligns with the fundamental principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution:

• Article 14 (Right to Equality): Ensures that no individual or group is discriminated against based on race, caste, or religion.
• Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty): Mob lynching directly violates the right to life, and this section aims to protect this fundamental right more effectively.
• Article 19(1)(a) (Freedom of Speech): There is a fine balance between freedom of expression and the responsibility to prevent hate speech, which often incites mob violence. Legal provisions like Section 103(2) serve as deterrents against the misuse of free speech to incite hatred.

Role of Law Enforcement and Challenges in Implementation

Effective enforcement is critical to the success of Section 103(2). Law enforcement agencies face several challenges:

• Investigative Limitations: Gathering evidence in mob lynching cases is complex, as mobs often scatter quickly, and identifying perpetrators becomes difficult.
• Witness Protection: Intimidation and fear often deter witnesses from coming forward. Strengthening witness protection programs is essential.

The Ministry of Home Affairs has issued Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to handle mob violence cases, emphasizing prompt FIR registration, swift investigation, and ensuring accountability. However, continuous training and sensitization of law enforcement personnel are crucial for effective implementation.

Judicial Interpretations and Landmark Cases

The Supreme Court of India has also issued guidelines and directions to address mob lynching, including recommendations for preventive, remedial, and punitive measures. The Tehseen S. Poonawalla case (2018) is a landmark judgment where the Supreme Court laid down specific guidelines for the government and law enforcement agencies to curb mob violence and ensure accountability.

Beyond the Tehseen S. Poonawalla case, several landmark judgments provide context for understanding mob violence:

• Nirbhaya Gang Rape Case: Though not a lynching case, it underscores how the judiciary views crimes involving collective violence. The court emphasized the need for strict punishments to serve as a deterrent.
• State of Maharashtra v. Hanuman Vishnu Andore: This case discussed “common intention” under Section 34 IPC, a principle that can apply to mob lynching scenarios. Understanding “common intention” is crucial in prosecuting individuals in a mob.

These cases highlight the judiciary’s approach to collective crimes and the need for rigorous application of legal provisions like Section 103(2).

Case Studies and Practical Scenarios

Incorporating real-life case studies can illustrate how Section 103(2) would apply:

• Hypothetical Scenario: A mob lynches an individual based on false accusations of theft. Under Section 103(2), each participant would face life imprisonment or the death penalty, emphasizing the collective responsibility of the mob.
• Real-Life Cases: Analyzing the failure to convict in some high-profile cases due to lack of evidence can highlight the importance of strengthening investigative procedures.

Criticism and Potential Issues

Addressing criticisms ensures a balanced perspective:

• Misuse of Provisions: There are concerns that laws could be misused to target specific communities or suppress dissent. Safeguards must be in place to prevent wrongful accusations.
• Overlap with Existing Laws: Clarifying the relationship between Section 103(2) and provisions on unlawful assembly or rioting can prevent legal ambiguities.

Comparison between IPC and BNS provision  

Particulars of the Offense: Mob Lynching under Section 103(2) of the BNS

FAQs on Mob Lynching under Section 103(2) BNS

1. What is the meaning of Mob Lynching?
Mob lynching refers to the unlawful killing of an individual by a group (mob) based on prejudice or personal bias, often involving acts of violence carried out collectively without legal sanction.

2. What is the punishment for Mob Lynching in BNS?
Under Section 103(2) of the BNS, the punishment for mob lynching is either the death penalty or life imprisonment, along with a fine.

3. What constitutes “acting in concert” under this provision?
“Acting in concert” means that five or more individuals jointly participate in the act of murder, sharing a common intention and purpose, with coordinated actions leading to the crime.

4. Can a bystander be prosecuted under Section 103(2)?
No, a bystander cannot be prosecuted unless they actively participated in the mob’s actions or instigated the violence.

5. How does this section ensure justice for victims from marginalized communities?
Section 103(2) targets crimes motivated by prejudice (race, caste, community, etc.), emphasizing severe punishment for collective violence. This ensures accountability and protection for marginalized communities, deterring discriminatory acts.

6. What is Section 103(2) of BNS?

Section 103(2) criminalizes mob lynching—when five or more people commit murder based on prejudice (race, caste, sex, etc.). Each participant faces death or life imprisonment and a fine. It ensures accountability for group violence motivated by bias.

Overall, the BNS seeks to address mob lynching more effectively than the IPC by:

• Creating a specific offense: This clarifies the legal framework and facilitates targeted prosecutions.
• Imposing harsher punishments: This aims to deter individuals from participating in mob violence.
• Retaining and strengthening related provisions: This allows for a more comprehensive approach to tackling mob lynching and addressing the various stages of such crimes.

However, the effectiveness of these provisions will ultimately depend on their implementation and enforcement by law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.