PSDA - Interpretation of Statutes

ASSIGNMENT

Ques1 What is Committee Reports and Law Commission Reports

Solution: -

The Law Commission of India is an executive-level advisory body that was established by
the government of India. The Law Commission of India is neither a constitutional body nor a
statutory body. The Commission is an ad hoc body that is constituted to achieve a desired
goal or objective of improvising the legal system in India. The Law Commission of India is
composed of certain legal experts, advocates, judges, as well as professors. The Commission
is headed by a retired judge. The Commission carries out the function of advising the Indian
government by doing legal research and suggesting legal reforms depending on the prevalent
situation. The commission is established under the Ministry of Law and Justice for a fixed
time period, normally 3 years.

It is to be noted that the Law Commission of India is not defined under the Indian
Constitution. However, it is constituted as a part of the implementation of Article 39A of the
Constitution of India, which was included by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment)
Act of 1976. Article 39A of the Constitution of India obliges the state to –

• ensure that the legal system functions to promote justice based on equal
opportunity for all;
• shall offer free legal assistance through appropriate legislation or programs;
• to guarantee that no citizen is deprived of the opportunity to get justice due to a
lack of resources or other impediments.
The Commission had Justice Balbir Singh Chauhan as its last chairman. He served as the
chairman of the 21st Law Commission of India till August 31st, 2018. The tenure of the 21st
Law Commission of India expired on August 31st, 2018. Later on, the Government of India
established the 22nd Law Commission for a period of 3 years starting on February 21, 2020.
However, since the inception of the 22nd Law Commission of India, it has been a part of the
news as it does not have a chairman or members appointed.

Recently, the Supreme Court of India asked the Ministry of Law and Justice the reason
behind so much delay in the appointment of the Chairman and members of the 22nd Law
Commission of India. In a reply to the Supreme Court of India, Minister of Law and Justice
Kiren Rijiju stated that, as per the Constitution of India, no time frame has been drawn for the
appointment of the Chairman and members of the Law Commission of India. Advocating the
unnecessary delay, the Minister of Law and Justice stated that it is important for the Law
Commission of India to represent members of all sections of society.
Significant reports and recommendations by the Law Commission of India
As of now, there are a total of 277 reports submitted by the Law Commission of India. Some
of these reports and recommendations are as follows –

185th report by the Law Commission of India on the review of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

After a thorough examination of the former reports by the commission, it asserted the
following recommendation –

1. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, was the focus of a report on the review by the
Sixteenth Law Commission in 2003. Nevertheless, the Law Commission had
already filed a report about the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which wasn’t taken
into consideration. Later on, all the reports of the Law Commission on the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 were compiled and reviewed under the 185th report by the
Law Commission.
2. Despite the Law Commission’s agreement that the document’s definition covered
everything, it opted to widen its scope in light of recent developments in
technology and the law. The Commission stated that although consideration must
be given to the validity of computer-generated evidence and the parties would
have knowledge of the privacy concerning their computer system, it should be
treated similarly to other records.
3. The Law Commission advised that, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s
ruling in Kamta Devi v. Poshi Ram (2001), it was not necessary to specifically
include DNA as a kind of evidence under the Act.
4. Following its decision in State of U.P v. Ramesh Prasad Mishra (1996), the
Supreme Court directed that statements determining the cause of the criminal
intent be made admissible in court. It was advised under Section 32(1), which
addresses the declaration of death,
5. The Law Commission suggested adding Section 53A to enhance women’s safety
in the workplace. A group of specialists is there to reinforce the provision’s
emphasis on relying on the evidence. To assist the court in making decisions based
on the facts, the Commission recommended hiring more such medical
professionals. These professionals will deal with stenography, international law,
footprints, fingerprints, and other evidence.
6. If evidence is admitted, the Commission may advise amendments to Section 10 of
the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Commission suggested changing the phrase
‘with reference to’ to ‘in furtherance of’ to widen its ambit.
7. The Commission clarified Section 13 of the Act to put an end to the debate around
it.
8. After analysing Section 23 of the Act, certain modifications were suggested. When
interpreted in conjunction with Section 126, Section 23 states that statements to
 which both parties have agreed to be presented as evidence are excluded. The
Commission suggested that –

• Upon mutual agreement between the parties, such evidence may be allowed.
• Even after being impacted by the acts of the arguing parties, the third party cannot
produce such evidence.
• Evidence admission becomes crucial in determining whether an agreement existed
or in addressing the issue of latency.

9. Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 addresses confessions gained through
coercion, inducement, or assurance. The Commission proposed expanding this
Section to include justifications for rejecting confessions obtained using such
methods as coercion, violence, and torture.
10. Concerned about the discrepancy between Section 63‘s definition of secondary
evidence and clause (b) to clause (g) of Section 65, the Commission stated that it
wanted to clarify this issue. These provisions were found to be acceptable in court
despite not falling under the purview of secondary evidence. So it suggested
amending Section 63 to remove the contradiction.
11. The Commission proposed amending Section 90 and supplementing it with
Section 90A, which will deal with issues relating to documents that are older than
20 years. Consequently, an assumption about the documents could be raised in
court. As a result, the court may make an assumption and continue the proceedings
in circumstances where the records could not be authenticated.
12. The Law Commission advised changing Section 112 of the Act, which deals with
the paternity presumption of the child so that DNA would be properly recognized
in the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.
13. The Law Commission also looked at Section 27, which addresses the applicability
of any significant information. The Commission recommended the following:

• Section 27 of the Act should create a restriction on Section 26.

• Section 27 should act as an exception to Section 25 of the act.
• It is necessary to substitute the word ‘or’ for the comma in the phrase “from a
person accused of any offence, in the custody of the police officer” in order to
make Section 27 an exception to both sections, i.e., sections 25 and 26.
• Section 27 should be rewritten to eliminate statements obtained through incentive,
threat, or other means, as stated in Section 24 of the Act.

200th report by the Law Commission of India on Media trial

The Law Commission of India submitted the 200th report on the Media trial in 2006. It
advocated a statutory restriction on the media’s ability to report any information that would
be harmful to the rights of the accused in any criminal matter.
From the time of the arrest until the conclusion of the investigation and trial, basically, till the
verdict has been announced, the media is not permitted to report certain details as mentioned
in the report. The Law Commission states that the newspaper articles that are reported have a
negative impact on the entire judicial process. So, in order to prevent criminal contempt of
court, the statutory restriction should be implemented.

The Commission also suggested changing certain provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act,
1971. The Law Commission also suggested giving the High Court the authority to order
electronic or print media to suspend reporting on any criminal matter.

244th report of the 20th Law Commission of India on electoral disqualifications

This report was submitted to the Ministry of Law and Justice in the year 2014. This report by
the law commission deals with two issues, namely –

• Electoral disqualification of candidates who have a criminal background.

• Consequences of submitting false affidavits
Some of the significant suggestions made by the report are as follows –

1. The adoption of appropriate legislation would actually aid in reducing the

criminalisation of politics because, generally, existing legislation is ineffective and
leads to extensive legal proceedings and fewer convictions.
2. It is essential that the procedures involving the different levels of conviction are
properly carried out in order to minimise the criminalisation of politics. As a
result, appropriate precautions should also be introduced.
The Commission also recommended the following changes to the process of formulating
charges –

1. If accusations are brought against any member of Parliament or Legislative

Assembly who is currently in office, the matter must be concluded as early as
possible. A timeframe of one year for such cases is also recommended.
2. If charges are drawn in less than a year following the applications for an election
are scrutinised, the candidate will not be disqualified. The disqualification charges
will not be dismissed except in cases where the person is acquitted by the court or
served the term of 6 years, whichever is earlier.
3. There should be measures in place to avoid the exploitation of laws as well as
remedies in the event of a lack of redress.
4. The MP or MLA in question will lose their eligibility after a year if the lawsuit is
not settled within that time.
5. Additionally, the MP or MLA’s income and other perks, as well as their right to
vote in the State Legislative Assembly or Parliament, respectively, would be
suspended.
6. The charges against the concerned person will be implemented retrospectively.
The following amendments must be made to the Representation of the People Act,
1951 regarding the recognition of false affidavits as a basis for disqualification –

A person who files false affidavits would be found guilty on the grounds of disqualification.

The commission suggested increasing the duration of the sentence, from a duration of at least
six months to a duration of at most two years.

Additionally, daily sessions should be undertaken with a one-day break to allow for the
raising of complaints regarding nomination papers. There should be an interval between the
final nomination filing date and the date of scrutiny.

Filing a false affidavit should be considered a ‘corrupt practice’ under the Act.

255th report of the Law Commission of India on electoral reforms

The Law Commission of India submitted its report on electoral reforms in 2015 to the
Ministry of Law and Justice. The issue of electoral reforms was raised by the Ministry of
Law and Justice to the 20th Law Commission. The suggestions by the 255th report are as
follows –

Expenditure on elections

• The Commission’s first concern was the extension of the time frame for the
candidate’s election-related expenses from the day of election notification to the
day of result declaration. At first, it was from the nomination date to the results
announcement date.
• Also, the commission suggested amending Section 182(1) of the Companies Act
of 2013, which mandates that a political party receive a donation from the
company’s funds at the annual general meeting rather than the board of directors.
• The introduction of a new Section 77A would make sure that the concerned
candidates or the authorised agents establish an account in which they must
disclose the specifics of any individual contribution obtained by the party from any
source. The source excludes the government and businesses, as well as any
payments made by the entity after the date of notification of voting.
• The commission recommended including a new Section 78A that requires the
District Election Officer to upload the expense reports submitted by each candidate
contesting elections under Section 78.
• A new section will be added that would penalise violations of Section 182 of the
Companies Act, 2013 and 29B of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,
when it comes to accepting contributions from individuals or groups who are not
allowed. If found guilty, the fine would be charged at a rate of five times the
amount.
Political party regulations

• Section 29A(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which deals with
the regulation of political groups, is to be modified. By agreeing to this change, the
parties pledge to refrain from inciting violence for political purposes and to treat
all individuals equally regardless of their class, caste, gender, ethnicity, creed, sex,
or place of residence.
• Chapter IVC, which will deal with the “Regulation of Public Parties,” would be
included. It would also include, with some changes, the suggestions provided by
the Law Commission in its 170th Report.
• The same part should also add Section 29R, which will legally require a political
party to be deregistered if it has lost repeatedly in state and parliamentary elections
for the preceding ten years.