Centre’s rejection of Bengal’s Aparajita Bill sparks political and legal clash.
Kolkata: The stage is set for another round of acrimony between the Mamata Banerjee Government and the Centre. This time, it is over the Aparajita Women and Child (West Bengal Criminal Laws Amendment) Bill, 2024, which was passed unanimously by the State Assembly following mass protests against the horrific rape-murder of a 31-year-old junior doctor at the State-run R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital in August last year.
On Friday, top Raj Bhavan sources said that the Bill had been returned by President Droupadi Murmu, and consequently, Governor C.V. Ananda Bose has followed suit. “There are serious concerns about the severity and proportionality of its proposed punishments for rape and sexual assault,” top sources told The Sunday Guardian.
The main controversy revolves around the Bill’s proposal to increase minimum sentences for rape from the existing 10 years under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) to “life imprisonment for the remainder of the convict’s natural life or capital punishment.” In cases where rape leads to death or a persistent vegetative state, the Bill mandates the death penalty, removing judicial discretion in sentencing.
The Bill also recommends removing age-based distinctions, deleting BNS Section 65, which currently prescribes stricter penalties for sexual assault of minors under 16 and 12 years. Sources in the Central Government said this would weaken special protections for children and violate the principle of proportionality, as the same harsh penalty could be applied regardless of the victim’s age.
Facing mounting public protests and outrage in the State after allegations of complicity and cover-up by the administration, the Bill was drafted within 48 hours by the law firm Aquilaw, which represented Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in her personal capacity and thereafter also represented the State Government. The Aparajita Bill was pushed by Mamata Banerjee as an attempt to cap mounting public outrage against her administration and party. Even though the State BJP pointed out that the Bill’s provisions went against the BNS, it did not oppose it and let it pass unanimously in the Bengal Assembly.
After the Governor reserved the Bill for presidential consideration last year, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued strong objections, citing the “excessive harshness.” The MHA termed mandatory life or death sentences for all convicted rapists as “excessively harsh and disproportionate,” potentially violating constitutional norms and Supreme Court precedents, including the seminal Mithu vs Punjab (1983) case, which ruled against mandatory death sentences without judicial discretion.
The removal of special punishments for crimes against minors was flagged as “diluting” existing protections for vulnerable groups—a concern echoed by legal experts and children’s rights activists.
“As of now, there is no communication from anyone with regard to the Aparajita Bill. We will consider taking suitable measures, as per requirements in the matter, if and when we receive such intimation,” a senior bureaucrat of the State said.
Eminent criminal lawyer Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee said, “In this Bill, the principle of proportionality was violated. The principle that different degrees of crime require appropriately graded punishments was deemed violated by the Bill’s blanket penalties, leading to the strong recommendation that the Bill be reconsidered. No State law can be in conflict with the Central law.”
