The Legal Framework Behind Lockdown

Must Read

An Insight into Custodial Death in India

“The occurrence of Custodial deaths in the world’s greatest democracy has raised the eyebrows of every citizen and shaken...

Implications in Travel Insurance in Light of the COVID-19 Crisis

As the world, today is crippled by this once in a century pandemic and as of date more than...

Second-Round Effects of Rent Control Laws: The Argentine Case

Introduction In colonial India, a city had an issue with its cobra population, which was a problem clearly in need...

Why Are the Big Techs of Silicon Valley Accused of Anti-Competitive Behaviours?

The big tech giants of the Silicon Valley are facing major challenges with relation to their monopolistic powers after...

KSK announces Sanjay Kumar as a Partner for Pharma & Life Sciences Practice

New Partner for KSK's Pharma & Life Sciences Practice King Stubb & Kasiva recently announced that Mr Sanjay Kumar has...

The Debate Between IPR and Competition Law Explained

There are various market processes or structures that govern market scenario. For simplicity, this paper focuses on two mechanisms:...

Follow us

On Tuesday, 24th March 2020, the Government of India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared a country-wide complete lockdown till 14th April 2020, to combat the Covid-19 pandemic. It all started with the Janata curfew which was observed throughout the nation on 22nd March 2020. As we enter the Unlock Phase 2 (Unlock 2.0), there is a slight reason to discuss its legality. Chances of the Supreme Court hearing the matter are bleak due to the current restrictions on case filings. However, that doesn’t prevent us from scrutinizing its legality and assessing the laws and regulations which were enacted to implement the lockdown. 

Laws Governing the Lockdown

The Central government took recourse to two laws that provide the Central Government and the State Governments the statutory basis for acting against a catastrophic global pandemic like COVID-19: the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (DMA, 2005), and Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 (EDA, 1897).

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), headed by Mr. Amit Shah, invoked the lockdown under Section 6(2)(i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The ministry published the official notification stating the rules and guidelines to be followed by every State and Union Territory, under section 10 of the abovementioned act. It limited the movement of 1.3 billion people and which led to the closure of offices, non-essential shops, schools, colleges, places of worship, gyms, salons, and malls. It also resulted in the closure of all modes of transport services. The Disaster Management Act of 2005 provides for the establishment of the National Disaster Management Authority to be chaired by the honorable Prime Minister. Section 6 of the DMA, the powers and functions of the National Authority includes laying down policies and guidelines to be followed by all States, Union Territories, and Union Ministries for the prevention of the said disaster. According to the DMA, 2005; ‘disaster’ means a calamity, catastrophe, or grave occurrence in an area, arising from natural or man-made causes resulting in substantial loss of life or human suffering. This act was mainly established to encounter situations like an earthquake or flood and not a disease. On 14th March, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs declared COVID-19 as ‘notified disaster’ because of which the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 can be applied in this scenario. Furthermore, the National Disaster Management Authority published social distancing regulations and other safety measures on 24th March for the safety of citizens.

Various states such as Maharashtra, Karnataka, and West Bengal also invoked Section 2 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897.  Section 2 of the EDA, 1897 states that if the state government is satisfied that the state or if a particular area within the state is threatened with an outbreak of any dangerous epidemic disease, it can pass orders or prescribe temporary rules and regulations to be followed by the public to prevent the outbreak and upsurge of that particular disease. Even though terms like ‘lockdown’ and ‘curfew’ aren’t defined under the Indian law, we can derive the closest meaning of ‘lockdown’ from the Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897. Lockdown can be defined as a situation in which free and absolute movement of goods is impeded, except the essential items and goods which are defined under Section 2,3, and 4 of the EDA, 1897.

Some of the numerous new terms which we came across in this lockdown are ‘quarantine’ and ‘isolation’. Both of these terms are defined under the Indian Aircraft (Public Health) Rules, 1954. ‘Quarantine’ means the restriction of activities or separation of suspect persons from others who are not ill or of suspect baggage or goods to prevent the spread of infection or disease. Similarly, ‘Isolation’ means separation of ill or contaminated persons or affected baggage and from others to prevent the spread of infection.

Punishment for Violating the Law

The guidelines published by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) also mention the punishment if anyone violates the respective guidelines and orders, he/ she will be held liable under Sections 51 to 60 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Sections 51 to 60 of the DMA, 2005 lays down the offenses and penalties, whereas Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code states that if any public servant disobeys an order and causes obstruction, injury, or annoyance to a person who is lawfully employed, he or she will be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or with fine.

A Need for Concrete Steps

People might feel that the lockdown is tantamount to the violation of the fundamental right of movement and the right to assemble peacefully within the territory of India, under Article 19 (1) (d) and Article 19 (1) (b) of the Indian Constitution. It cannot be termed void as this right is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2). 

The situation is getting worse with the crippling of economic activity because of the increase in the unemployment rate and a sudden plunge in import-export and business activities. Close to 14 crore people lost their jobs and domestic workers, on the other hand, are being confronted with financial hardships and other challenges. There are only two laws which are governing the domestic workers, the Unorganized Workers Act, 2008, and the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. But both of these acts are incompetent and ineffective. Even though the government has been allocating funds, initiating schemes and packages, and providing transport facilities to help them, the Legislation needs to come up with something more than a Disaster Management Act to fight against a global pandemic like COVID-19. With the death toll crossing the 20k mark, the government must come up with new schemes and medical policies, especially for the lower sections of society. Moreover, we require a legal framework with better and updated rules and regulations to revive the splintered economy. There is a stringent need for enacting a COVID-19 law to resuscitate the economic, medical, education, and financial sectors.

References

  1. https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/explained-the-legal-framework-behind-the-lockdown
  2. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/10469/1/the_epidemic_diseases_act%2C_1897.pdf

This Article is written by Shishir Johary, Student at NMIMS School of Law, Mumbai. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work, except the drinking water component...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years old (victim) at their home....

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of the Applicant to release him...

Proof of Infliction of Fatal Injury Not Mandatory for Conviction Under Section 307, IPC: Tripura High Court

In the case of Mamin Miah vs the State of Tripura, a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S....

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -