"Adjustment Period Is Needed, We Are Also Learning": Kerala High Court In PIL Challenging Hindi Titles Of New Criminal Laws
The Kerala High Court has asked the petitioner who challenged the Hindi titles for the new criminal laws whether the matter was justiciable. The case came for hearing before the bench of Acting Chief Justice A. M. Mustaque and Justice S. Manu.
“First you tell us what is the justiciable act? What can be brought before the Court? What cannot be brought before the Court? We are not the authority to correct everything here. There may be mistake, there may be wrong. When does a PIL lie?” the bench questioned.
The petition was filed stating that Hindi titles of the new criminal acts contravene the provisions of Article 348 of the Constitution.
Article 348(1)(b)(ii) says that the authoritative text of all Acts passed by Parliament shall be in English. It was said that members of the legal fraternity who do not speak Hindi/ Sanskrit might find it difficult to pronounce these names. They create difficulty, ambiguity and confusion among them. Thus, it affects the fundamental rights of employment given under Article 19(1)(g).
The Court stated that an adjustment period would be required for any such changes and that even the judges were learning the names of the new acts albeit it a little confusing. It was stated that classes had been organised in the judicial academy which were being attended by the judges.
The Court also asked the petitioner what rights of the citizens were getting infringed and remarked that the High Court judges were not elected representatives. It was stated that even though they held constitutional offices, it should not mean that they should override the wisdom of those in the Parliament.
The Counsel for the Union of India argued that the names are given in English letters. As for Hindi words, there are also other Acts like Prasar Bharati Act, Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha Act which have such names.
The petitioner argued that the Constitution says English language, not English letters. He further added that these were the major criminal Acts, unlike the other Acts referenced by the Union counsel.
The Court agreed to the petitioner's argument that the short forms of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita(BNS) and Bharathiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS) can be mistakenly interchanged. It said that anything new would be difficult initially and that the new Acts were being taught in the Judicial Academy as well.
The case is next posted on the 29th of July.
Case Title: P. V. Jeevesh v Union of India and Others
Case Number: WP(C) 19240/ 2024