This was such an insightful and informative session I was totally absorbed in the conversation 👍 It definitely helps to understand and form an opinion on the new criminal laws
There is no law which curses their own citizens badly and provisions of relief to have fundamental rights for all citizens. Law is the reflection of life with satety, security and liberty and justice blessed by our constitution.
Macaulay ne jitne mehnat ki thi uske 1 % bhi nahi ki in logo ne, itne bade divers desh mein ek kanoon lana koi joke nahi hai, intense study he did. Although 'some' provisions he made were to supress Indians but it could be simply removed by amendments. Most of the content is copy pasted from Macaulay's work
inablity to cath offender, is failure of POlice. So trial in absentia means accepting the the police system is ineffective and we cannot catch the offender
Anupji, the only sensible point you have made is with respect to capacity for enforcement. But you have failed to provide any other significant reason why the new laws are not good. All the points you have made are trivial. As regards the amendment route, you are totally wrong. Just as in corporate restructuring, rolling out of projects lije ERP, drastic changes can be brought about only by a robust new philosophy. So please don't go about bad mouthing the long over due changes.
laws are not good because the power of police to take prevenive action has been expanded. No clarity on what will happen if final report is not submitted within the statutory limit No option on prosecution of public servants for excesses escially by IPS and IAS officers DM still enjoys immense penal powers despite it being an admisitrative post.
The language of the laws remain same. Despite english beig an imposed language we continue to use the same method of writing status which Anglo-saxons used back in their days. 1974 crpc words were so vague that it gave ablity to police to play with words and arrest libery, the same has been continued in the new laws.
British Criminal laws introduced in india in 1861 are totally inhuman laws And totally against to human rights. Britishers introduced those laws to harass indians who raise their mouths for freedom of voice .today introduced criminal laws too bad and People have to be known in their own regional languages.about these new Criminal laws
The way Mr. Anup breaks down to the basics of each thing is such a genius
Another steps towards Total authoritarian govt. Good job🥰🥰
❤❤"Modi hai to mumkim hai"❤❤❤
Bold and beautiful answers, kudos
Verry truly said
Must watch interview to get clarity over the pros and cons of new criminal laws. Thank u Anup sir!
TRUTH ALWAYS TRIUMPHS
Satya meva Jayathe. Our motto should be maintained well. Good.
This was such an insightful and informative session
I was totally absorbed in the conversation 👍
It definitely helps to understand and form an opinion on the new criminal laws
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
There is no law which curses their own citizens badly and provisions of relief to have fundamental rights for all citizens. Law is the reflection of life with satety, security and liberty and justice blessed by our constitution.
I expected the Honourable SC would quash these new laws. Rest assured, India will never move forward if such laws govern the land.
It'll get developed gradually. During GST same apprehension was there.
What is there except names that is English in old law to change
Good good
I agree with ngo cannot file mercy petition when convict show no remorse.
Lo and behold both are reading!
Matrimonial cases, common man, in absentia trials
If Macaulay is so lucid why so much of controversy over sedition law enacted by British
Macaulay ne jitne mehnat ki thi uske 1 % bhi nahi ki in logo ne, itne bade divers desh mein ek kanoon lana koi joke nahi hai, intense study he did. Although 'some' provisions he made were to supress Indians but it could be simply removed by amendments. Most of the content is copy pasted from Macaulay's work
positive changes are POTENTIAL!! haha
Anup proposes there should not be any trial in absentia and wants people to flee and escape punishment
inablity to cath offender, is failure of POlice. So trial in absentia means accepting the the police system is ineffective and we cannot catch the offender
Anupji, the only sensible point you have made is with respect to capacity for enforcement.
But you have failed to provide any other significant reason why the new laws are not good.
All the points you have made are trivial.
As regards the amendment route, you are totally wrong. Just as in corporate restructuring, rolling out of projects lije ERP, drastic changes can be brought about only by a robust new philosophy.
So please don't go about bad mouthing the long over due changes.
laws are not good because the power of police to take prevenive action has been expanded.
No clarity on what will happen if final report is not submitted within the statutory limit
No option on prosecution of public servants for excesses escially by IPS and IAS officers
DM still enjoys immense penal powers despite it being an admisitrative post.
The language of the laws remain same. Despite english beig an imposed language we continue to use the same method of writing status which Anglo-saxons used back in their days.
1974 crpc words were so vague that it gave ablity to police to play with words and arrest libery, the same has been continued in the new laws.
@@aksshaysharma96 Appreciate your response, agree with you on the administrative part- powers etc.
@@kaushalendraraomannava4578 thank you very much sir
British Criminal laws introduced in india in 1861 are totally inhuman laws And totally against to human rights.
Britishers introduced those laws to harass indians who raise their mouths for freedom of voice .today introduced criminal laws too bad and People have to be known in their own regional languages.about these new Criminal laws
SATYAM SHIVAM SUNDARAM SATYA HI SHIV HAI SHIV HI SUNDAR HAI
Erroneous