What do the couples hauled up from hotels in Madh island, the woman allegedly bashed by the police at Lalbaug and a Juhu businessman threatened by the police have in common? All of them were booked under the notorious section 110 of the Bombay Police Act. The spate of incidents in the last two months have once again focused attention on the misuse of the 65-year-old law and demand by legal experts to curb the discretionary powers that it grants to the police.
Section 110 brings under its purview obscenity, indecent behaviour and disorderly conduct but fails to explain what acts constitute the crime. “The law does not define what could constitute an indecent act or disorderly conduct and leaves it to the discretion of the police,” says Delhi-based lawyer Shilpi Jain, who is representing a petitioner seeking inquiry into the Madh raids. “The law is grossly misused, as even questioning a police officer can be brought under the wide sweep of this law. There is an urgent need to curb the powers as the use of this law cannot be left to the fancy of the police,” added advocate Jain, who in the petition had urged the Bombay high court to set up a committee under a retired HC judge to look into the misuse of the Act.
IPS officer-turned lawyer Y P Singh calls the BPA a “draconian” law though it involves offences which even upon conviction prescribe a jail term of three to six months or a few hundred rupees in fines. “The offences that come under this law are petty, but ironically police have the power to arrest without a warrant,” said advocate Singh. Under the criminal laws, police can arrest without a warrant in cognisable cases, but require court’s permission to arrest a person in non-cognisable cases. Besides discretionary powers of arrest, the use of this law does not require much paper work. “These are not cognisable offences so they do not require the police to file a First Information Report (FIR), nor do they reflect in the crime statistics of the area,” said the advocate, adding, “the omnibus scope and wordings of the BPA leaves it open for misinterpretation and misuse”.
According to advocate Samir Vaidya, most people nabbed under the law would like to avoid the hassle and pay up the cash bail of Rs 1,200 so that they are released. “There are no checks and balances and it’s high time this archaic law is junked,” said Vaidya.