Jharkhand High Court Addresses Error in Legal Bare Act Publication

The Jharkhand High Court has recently taken proactive measures to rectify an error identified in the Universal LexisNexis edition of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) bare act. This initiative was spearheaded by a bench comprising of Justices Ananda Sen and Subhash Chand, who flagged an inaccuracy within the legal document.

Specifically, the discrepancy was noted in section 103(2) of the BNS, which pertains to the subject of lynching. The misinterpretation occurred in the reinterpretation of the law as presented in the LexisNexis version.

Section 103(2) elucidates the consequences for a group of five or more individuals who collaborate to commit murder based on factors like race, caste, or community. The error in the publication altered the wording from ‘any other similar ground’ to ‘any other ground,’ potentially leading to significant implications.

In light of the gravity of this oversight, the Jharkhand High Court bench mandated that a corrigendum be published in both national and regional newspapers by the responsible publisher. This corrective action aims to rectify the confusion stemming from the erroneous phrasing in the legal text.

Ritu Kumar, the president of the Jharkhand High Court Advocates’ Association, underscored the importance of addressing such errors promptly. She highlighted the need for accuracy in legal publications to uphold the integrity of the judicial system.

Additionally, legal expert Mohammad Shadab Ansari, who has previously handled cases related to lynching incidents, emphasized the significance of precise language in legal frameworks. He pointed out that the terminology used could have wide-ranging implications, particularly in cases involving sensitive matters like communal violence.

Furthermore, Ansari referenced the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment of 2018 from the Supreme Court, indicating its relevance in cases related to lynching under the BNS. He also alluded to the corresponding provisions of IPC 153A, which address the promotion of enmity between different social groups.

As the legal community in Jharkhand grapples with this editorial misstep, the focus remains on ensuring that legal texts accurately reflect the intentions and nuances of the law. The collaborative efforts between legal professionals and the judiciary are instrumental in upholding the sanctity of legal discourse in the region.