The Bar Associations of North Indian states compromising of states of Uttarpradesh, Uttaranchal,Himachal Pradesh, Punjab,Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir and Delhi have announced complete strike on January.19. 2009.
This is first co-ordinated effort by Bar Associations of India to oppose the Bill which seeks to amend section 41 and section 309 of Criminal Procedure Code of India.
Different bar Associations in India has been resorting to strikes, quite now and then for the last couple of months.
Circulars and Bills issued on respective Letter heads of Bar Associations, warn of strict action if any lawyer were to be found violating the call of the strike.
The lawyers of whole of India would again go on strike on Feb 3 2009.They have announced nation-wide demonstration and protest marches and street corner meeting against the Bill on 18 Feb, 2009.
Mr Lalit Maken, the Urban Development Minister, who once belonged to legal fraternity, in an interface with lawyers held at Patiala House Courts, Delhi, on 15 Jan 2009 vowed to take up the issue with his colleagues in the Cabinet, the prime minister, and the president of India against the proposed Bill.
The Bill takes away certain categories of offences under sections 41 and 309 Criminal Procedure Code of India, which gives mandatory arrest power to the police.
This is first co-ordinated effort by Bar Associations of India to oppose the Bill which seeks to amend section 41 and section 309 of Criminal Procedure Code of India.
Different bar Associations in India has been resorting to strikes, quite now and then for the last couple of months.
Circulars and Bills issued on respective Letter heads of Bar Associations, warn of strict action if any lawyer were to be found violating the call of the strike.
The lawyers of whole of India would again go on strike on Feb 3 2009.They have announced nation-wide demonstration and protest marches and street corner meeting against the Bill on 18 Feb, 2009.
Mr Lalit Maken, the Urban Development Minister, who once belonged to legal fraternity, in an interface with lawyers held at Patiala House Courts, Delhi, on 15 Jan 2009 vowed to take up the issue with his colleagues in the Cabinet, the prime minister, and the president of India against the proposed Bill.
The Bill takes away certain categories of offences under sections 41 and 309 Criminal Procedure Code of India, which gives mandatory arrest power to the police.
According to the new law the police would issue notice of appearance, instead of arresting an accused involved in an offence carrying punishment up to 7 years.
Among the grouses of the lawyers is that the law if enacted will eat into their work substantially reducing their income. A sizable income of the lawyers is generated by Bail related works.
According to the proposed amendment it would not be mandatory for the police to arrest the offenders involved in theft, assault, dowry related cases, chain snatching, child abduction, pick-pocketing, stabbing, infringement of copyright and trade marks.
Human rights groups say that sweeping power of arrest in a poor country like India where 800million people some how manage to earn Rs. 20/- per day, the power punishes the delinquents and their dependents too harshly.
Thousands languish behind bars for years on ends even after courts have ordered their release, because they are not able to arrange the security amount or equivalent which is usually Rs. ten thousand equivalent to 200 U.S Dollars.
Lawyers say this will increase the incidence of crime and aggravate security related problems.
According to the proposed amendment it would not be mandatory for the police to arrest the offenders involved in theft, assault, dowry related cases, chain snatching, child abduction, pick-pocketing, stabbing, infringement of copyright and trade marks.
Human rights groups say that sweeping power of arrest in a poor country like India where 800million people some how manage to earn Rs. 20/- per day, the power punishes the delinquents and their dependents too harshly.
Thousands languish behind bars for years on ends even after courts have ordered their release, because they are not able to arrange the security amount or equivalent which is usually Rs. ten thousand equivalent to 200 U.S Dollars.
Lawyers say this will increase the incidence of crime and aggravate security related problems.
The Joint Commissioner of Police (crime) said that the morale of the force might be affected negatively if citizens begin questioning as to why the police has stopped arresting the accused and instead handing out challans to the accused. They might even accuse the police of nepotism.
