Striking Down of Beggary Act

Why in news?

Delhi High Court has struck down as unconstitutional, certain sections of Bombay Prevention of Beggary Act, 1959, as extended to Delhi.
It, thereby, has decriminalised beggary.

What is the Act about?

There is no any central Act in India on beggary.
Hence many states and Union Territories have used the Bombay Prevention of Beggary Act, 1959 as the basis for their own laws.
The objective was to keep the streets of then Bombay clear of the destitute, leprosy patients or the mentally ill.
It was formulated with the hope that they could be sent into institutions.

What are the contentious provisions?

The Act, essentially, criminalises begging.
It gives police the power to arrest individuals without a warrant.
It gives magistrates the power to commit them to a “certified institution” (a detention centre).
Detention could be up to 3 years on the commission of the first “offence”, and up to 10 years upon the second “offence”.
Their privacy and dignity is ignored by compelling them to allow themselves to be fingerprinted.
It authorises the detention of people “dependant” upon the “beggar” (read as family) and separation of children over the age of 5.
Certified institutions have absolute power over detainees.
This includes the power of punishment, and the power to exact “manual work”.
Disobeying the rules of the institution can land an individual in jail.

There were concerns that the Act was violating the fundamental rights of the citizen.
The Delhi HC order is the first in the country to strike down provisions of the 1959 Act.

What is the Court's order and observations?

The court has not struck down provisions that do not treat beggary per se as an offence.
It has also not struck down a Section that deals with penalty for employing or causing persons to beg.
This addresses forced begging or “begging rackets”, which are used to justify retaining the Act.
Activists advocating repeal of the Act, however, say that these can be dealt with existing provisions in the Indian Penal Code.
Observations - The Bench held that the Begging Act violated Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution.
The government argued that it did not intend to criminalise “involuntary” begging.
Court, however, noted that the definition of begging under the Act made no such distinction and therefore entirely arbitrary.
It also held that under Art 21, it was the State’s responsibility to provide the basic necessities for survival to all its citizens.
It stressed that poverty was the result of the state’s inability or unwillingness to discharge these obligations.
Therefore, the state could not criminalise the most visible and public manifestation of its own failures.

What are the alternatives?

Bill - The Centre made an attempt at repealing the Act through the Persons in Destitution (Protection, Care and Rehabilitation) Model Bill, 2016.
It had provisions including doing away with the Beggary Act and some provisions also allowed detention.
It also proposes rehabilitation centres for the destitute in each district.
But the discussion on the Bill was halted in 2016.
Bihar model - Bihar government has the Mukhyamantri Bhikshavriti Nivaran Yojana in place.
Under this, instead of detaining persons under the Act, open homes were set up.
Through this, community outreach for destitute persons was put in place.
Now, rehabilitation centres have been set up, with facilities for treatment, family reintegration and vocational training.

Source: Indian Express