Goonda Act: When prevention is not better than cure

Bengaluru: Under immense pressure to act following the spate of sexual crimes in the city, the state government has decided to amend the Goonda Act to bring acid attacks, illegal sand mining, money laundering, landgrabbing, digital offences and of course ‘sexual predators’ under its ambit.

But its hard to applaud it as it seems to have gone overboard in making the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates Act, more commonly known as the Goonda Act, a real threat.

In its new avatar, the Act allows the police to make a preventive arrest on mere suspicion. In fact, suspicion is enough to put an individual in prison for a year, with no possibility of bail. Not surprisingly, it is drawing harsh criticism from many quarters.

“I look at the amendment of the Goonda Act and the false arrest made at VIBGYOR school as very similar. Both decisions were made under pressure. There are other ways of apprehending criminals – the IPC and the IRPC for instance. The Act is now an omnibus, a hold-all legislation with all kinds of offenders from acid-throwers onwards being brought under it. The whole concept  has been diluted,” charges former law minister, Suresh Kumar, adding, “I don’t think there was any genuine concern for public welfare.

I don’t know how the courts will react to it and if it will stand the test of time.”

Supreme Court Advocate, K.V. Dhananjay too notes with concern that the Goonda Act says it’s okay if there are no real grounds for arrest. “If there are objective grounds, why arrest someone on suspicion? If you have a real case, you can get the offender a life sentence, instead of a 12–month prison term.

This is military law we’re looking at,” he says angrily, warning, “Bringing rape under the Act can also have major ramifications, because Goonda Acts across the country are used for organised crimes like bootlegging and slum-grabbing. Rape is a crime of passion and now anybody can be arrested on suspicion of committing it in future.”

In his view, the Digital Offences provision also raises a lot of questions. “We think only of pornography and visual content. But even verbal abuse could be called an offence now under the Act,” he points out. But there are loopholes. For instance, a person can only be booked under the Goonda Act if the offences committed by him “affect adversely or are likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order,” under the amendment.  

The fact that only habitual offenders may be booked under the Act also softens its otherwise draconian provisions. “For authorities to act under the amended law, it is mandatory for the offender to have committed the same offence habitually. The new amended law cannot be applied straightaway under the ambit of the Goonda Act in case of a first time offence,” explains Mr Ravi B. Naik, a former judge of the Karnataka High Court and senior advocate. But will the police, given near unfettered freedom to act under the changed law, let such ‘technicalities’ come in the way of exercising its new authority? That’s the concern.