India Tomorrow
NEW DELHI—The Delhi Police registered their first FIR against a 19-year-old street vendor under the new criminal law code on Monday morning. However, hours later, police said they were reviewing the case and are considering quashing the FIR .
The vendor was apprehended around 12:15 am by a sub-inspector for allegedly obstructing a public way with his cart near the foot over-bridge at New Delhi Railway Station. This swift reversal of the FIR sparked public outcry, particularly from opposition parties who accused the Centre of unfairly targeting vulnerable street vendors.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah addressed the controversy in a press conference later that day, confirming the decision to quash the FIR. However, Delhi Police did not provide a detailed explanation for their reversal.
The FIR, filed around 1:30 am under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), accused the vendor of causing obstruction by selling water, bidis, and cigarettes on the public road. The sub-inspector claimed to have warned the vendor several times and documented the incident using the E-Praman application. The FIR cited Section 285 of the BNS, which carries a fine of up to ₹5,000 for acts causing danger, obstruction, or injury on public ways.
This incident gained prominence as the first FIR under the new criminal laws, which replaced the long-standing British-era Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and Indian Evidence Act with the BNS, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) respectively.
The opposition, led by Congress, swiftly criticized the police action. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh condemned what he saw as the unjust targeting of the street vendor, while Arbind Singh, representing the National Association of Street Vendors of India, decried it as a misapplication of the new law, asserting the vendor’s right to earn a livelihood.
Amit Shah clarified that the actual first FIR under BNS occurred in Gwalior for a motorcycle theft, not in the Delhi street vendor case. He underscored that similar legal provisions existed in previous laws and that the decision to quash the vendor’s case followed a review by the authorities.
DCP Harsha Vardhan (central) declined to elaborate on the reasons behind the FIR’s quashing, but a senior police officer hinted that the decision stemmed from a re-evaluation of the facts. Meanwhile, the vendor, Pankaj Kumar, and his family expressed bewilderment and distress over the incident, questioning why their stall, operational since 2007, had suddenly become a target.
Throughout the day, Delhi Police continued to register FIRs under the new legal framework, with over 20 cases ranging from theft to accidents. Notable among them was an attempted murder case in Seelampur involving two unidentified individuals under the Arms Act, as well as the obstruction charge against a street vendor in Mangolpuri.
The introduction of these new criminal laws marks a significant shift in India’s legal landscape, yet these initial incidents have already ignited widespread controversy and debate regarding their implementation and implications.
