“Surely the new laws take into account the changing times and society,” says A Ajith Kumar, a public prosecutor. He is trying to find out how the 511 sections of the IPC have been condensed into.

“This is the technical difficulty that I speak of. The substance has not changed, and neither has utilities, but there is a technical difficulty for the practitioners. Those studying the law will be taught the new system, but we will have to read up the revisions and get it into our practice,” he says.

While many legal experts welcomed the new age to define children (from 15 to 18) and the extension of police custody up to 60 days to facilitate the investigation, several lawyers feel the process was an eye-wash that tilted towards an ‘unwanted’ nationalistic mindset.

The entire thing is going to throw up a huge challenge of re-learning, she says, adding, “The third-year students would be better equipped at the laws than practising advocates.”

Former Assistant Inspector General of Police Suneesh Kumar R says it is sure a victim-centric and women-centric system with punishments such as the death penalty for raping children under the age of 18, thanks to the new definition of children,

and the need to hear the victim in case of withdrawal of criminal cases by the state.

That said, there are some major drawbacks as well, he says. “Capital punishment in gang rape cases of minors could lead to the murder of more victims. Always, victims are the first witnesses of the crime, killing them removes the main witness,” he says.

Also, he adds, the wording is vague in some sections. “For example, BNS Section 69.”

The section says: ‘Whoever, by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, has sexual intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.’

“It points a moralistic finger at society. The wording can also be misinterpreted.

Also, for the in-absentia trial (BNSS 356), if convicted in-absentia, one cannot go for an appeal if the accused is absconding for more than three years,” he says.

Another major drawback, he says, is the lack of criminal remedy for sexual harassment of men. “It can only be addressed as a simple hurt case under BNS 321 and 323,” Suneesh says. That means sexual assault of men by men, transgender persons, and animals may go unpunished in future.

Gruesome crimes such as necrophilia, which needed to have been included, have also been left out.

“Sometimes, the sexual assault happens after killing the victim, and that now doesn’t classify as sexual assault,” he says.