Recent news headlines announced that the Government of Haryana introduced and passed the Haraya Recovery of Damages to Property During Disturbance to Public Order Bill, 2021. Notably, a similar bill, the Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, was enacted by the Uttar Pradesh Government in 2020. This fact-driven article will delve into these legislative developments that focus on recovery of damages to properties during public disturbances.
Main Provisions of the Bill
The Haryana Bill stipulates different provisions for various scenarios related to disturbances to public order. These include:
1. Recovery of Damages: The bill makes it possible to recover damages caused to properties during disturbances from both participants and instigators.
2. Compensation to Victims: It ensures that victims receive appropriate compensation.
3. Comprehensive Coverage: Both the instigators and participants of violence, as well as protest organizers and supporters are accountable.
4. Establishment of a Claim Tribunal: This provision allows for the determination of liability, assessment of damages, and compensation awards.
5. Property Attachment: The tribunal holds the power to attach property or bank account of any individual against whom an award has been declared.
6. Appeal against Tribunal: Any aggrieved person can appeal the tribunal’s decision at the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
Government’s Stand on the Bill
The government argues that it is their responsibility to protect private and government properties. They strike a balance between rights and responsibilities, stating that while citizens have the right to protest peacefully, no one has the right to damage property. The bill, they contend, provides a legal framework to deter perpetrators of violence.
Critics’ View on the Bill
Critics argue that the bill may violate SC guidelines and fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution. They also deem some aspects of the bill, such as identifying offenders and recovering losses, unclear.
Legal Provisions in India
Indian law currently lacks a central legislation for recovery of damages, despite the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. Although this act stipulates punishments for culprits, it does not provide for damage recovery.
Supreme Court Guidelines
In 2009, following recommendations from two expert Committees, the Supreme Court issued guidelines for rioting damages recovery. However, their effect has been minimal, prompting a need for law updates.
The Right to Protest vs. The Recovery of Damages
The contention between the right to protest and the need for public order is often heightened during agitations. With India’s history of civil disobedience rooted in its freedom struggle, protests have become part of the cultural fabric.
Global Practices and Suggestions
Internationally, the United States institutes state-wise laws with stringent penalties for protesters guilty of property damage or obstruction. Advocates suggest that protest organizers ensure their followers do not cause harm and be liable for any damages incurred. Facial recognition technology could be deployed to identify vandals, subject to privacy laws.
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984
This act punishes anyone found guilty of causing harm to public property, and can be combined with provisions under the Indian Penal Code.
Thomas Committee Recommendations
The Thomas Committee advised on reversing the burden of proof against protesters, which was accepted by the court.
Nariman Committee Recommendations
The Nariman Committee’s recommendations dealt with extracting damages for destruction. The Supreme Court accepted their recommendation, introducing strict liability for rioters and compensation collection for damage.
