ABSTRACT
The Jan Vishwas (Amendment and Provisions) Bill of 2025 stands as a fundamental shift in India’s regulatory functioning as it decriminalized 288 provisions across 16 Central Acts. This legislation replaces the punishment in the form of imprisonment with proportionately civil penalties and administrative mechanisms for technical violations. Rather than punishing minors with jail sentences, the bill establishes penalty systems, first time offender protections and trust-based governance models. These changes showcase major implications in the regulatory enforcement jurisprudence in India economic functioning and the functioning of courts and businesses in the country.
KEYWORDS
Decriminalization, Regulatory Offences, Jan Vishwas Bill, Civil Penalties, Administrative Adjudication, Ease of Doing Business, Criminal Law Reform, Trust-Based Governance
INTRODUCTION
India inherited an overly criminalized legal system since colonial times. The statutes promulgated and enforced during the 19th century criminalized conduct that modern democracies address through civil penalties and administrative fines. In present day, Indian law contains approximately 4,100 criminal offences and many of these punish procedural violations and technical defaults through imprisonment. This approach created predictable consequences and created a convenient environment for judges who struggled with caseloads exceeding capacity and entrepreneurs avoided business startups due to imprisonment risks and prison systems operated beyond maximum capacity.
Prior regulatory frameworks forced small business owners to take up defensive legal positioning. A trader accidentally misrepresenting product measurements faced criminal prosecution and imprisonment. A manufacturer missing documentation deadlines encountered criminal charges. This created a chilling effect on entrepreneurship, particularly among first-time business operators and small enterprises operating with limited legal resources.
Upon the recognition of these systemic failures, the Government initiated major reforms to decrease the magnitude of punishments for administrative offences through the Jan Vishwas Act 2023 which decriminalized 183 provisions. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill 2025, which initiated its operationalization in November significantly expands this transformation, wherein, across over 16 Central Acts, the Bill amends 355 provisions out of which, 288 through decriminalization and 67 through improvements. The legislation affects motor vehicle regulations, administration of pharmaceutical infrastructure, electrical infrastructure, municipal governance, agricultural exports and apprenticeships. This represents India’s step ahead towards “Minimum Government, Maximum Governance” to prioritize cooperative regulation rather than punitive state intervention.
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND MECHANISMS
The Bill lays down for structured decriminalization regulations which replace imprisonment with proportionate responses. Decriminalization incorporates major statutes such as Motor Vehicles Act of 1988, Drugs and Cosmetics Act of 1940, Electricity Act of 2003, Legal Metrology Act of 2009, Tea Act of 1953, Reserve Bank of India Act of 1934 and Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act of 2006. The scale represents unprecedented single-Bill coverage of amendments which affect and influence multiple sectors parallelly. The Bill systematically removes jail sentences for regulatory contraventions. Under the Electricity Act, non-compliance with Commission orders previously attracted three months imprisonment in addition to a fine of up to Rs. 1,00,000. The Bill replaces this with administrative civil penalties ranging from fine of amounts ranging from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 10,00,000. The determination of imposition of fine in this regard is done by designated officers rather than trial courts. Under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the 6 months imprisonment is decreased to Rs. 30,000 fines for civil penalties. 76 offences across 10 legislations receive special treatment to first time violators. The adverse causing of technical or procedural breaches triggers advisory notices or improvement warnings rather than penalties. The commission of subsequent violations incur graduated monetary sanctions and creates compliance incentives without harsh initial consequences. This framework acknowledges that initial violations typically reflect regulatory unfamiliarity rather than intentional wrongdoing.
The system establishes proportionate consequences which match the severity of the violations proportionally. The first breaches would lead to infraction of warnings, followed by second violations triggering modest penalties and recurring subsequent breaches lead to the imposition of escalated sanctions. This approach incentivizes voluntary compliance while maintaining deterrence through economic consequences rather than imprisonment. There is an automatic increase in the penalties by 10% every three years without any requirement for legislative amendments.
BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES
Decriminalization fundamentally transforms business operating environments and investment decisions. The removal of jail sentences eliminates the existential threat which hangs over entrepreneurs. In accordance with the previous framework, a proprietor misclassifying product led to him facing criminal conviction and imprisonment. This devastating personal consequence deterred business formation, particularly among first-time entrepreneurs and small operators. The elimination of risk of imprisonment removes this psychological and practical barrier to entrepreneurial activity. Previously, they used to maintain extensive defensive legal positions and hired expensive counsel to mitigate criminal prosecution risk. The decriminalization by the Bill permits for resource reallocation towards substantive operational compliance rather than for criminal risk mitigation. After the mitigation of imposition of legal liabilities, the companies redirect expenses being used for legal defense towards actual compliance improvements, enhancing regulatory outcomes while reducing overhead.
The civil adjudication which is conducted by designated officers must operate under established procedural rules to maintain transparency and certainty. Unlike criminal trials, wherein, the results vary substantially based on judges’ discretion and jurisdiction, the adoption and implementation of administrative proceedings follow consistent frameworks which enable for better business planning and risk assessment. After the adoption of the Amendment Bill, the companies gain confidence to invest in regulated sectors when penalty outcomes become predictable. The decriminalization signals regulatory sophistication and proportionality to domestic and international investors including foreign pharmaceutical companies, automotive manufacturers, electrical utilities and export enterprises expanding operations in jurisdictions offering rationalized regulatory frameworks.
JUDICIAL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPLICATIONS
The amendments of the Jan Vishwas (Amendment and Provision) Bill of 2025 and the subsequent decriminalization prove to be transformative effects throughout the overburdened Indian justice system. Indian Courts are currently running in the heavy backlog in terms of pending cases, wherein, a total of 5.3 crore are pending across Courts and several tribunals across India. The majority of the cases pending in district and subordinate courts wherein, the figure is close to 4.8 crore cases, while all 25 High Courts running in the backlog of 63 lakh pending cases and the Apex Court of India with approx 90,000 pending cases. Substantial portions involve minor regulatory violations prosecuted under overly criminalized statutes. Removing these violations from criminal courts frees judicial capacity for serious crimes such as homicide, rape, organized crime, terrorism, corruption. Judges spending several months to adjudicate on regulatory contraventions become available for serious criminal matters generating substantial social harm. Additionally, public prosecutors who manage regulatory violation cases can direct their focus towards serious issues such as organized crime, economic offences, and violent crime prosecution. This reallocation of punishment significantly strengthens criminal investigation quality and conviction rates for serious offences.
The officers who conduct civil adjudication follow streamlined procedures compared to criminal trials due to which cases get resolved in weeks rather than years and providing certainty to regulated entities and closing violation records rapidly. Indian prisons are currently operating at 120-140% capacity in which the prisoners are facing inhumane conditions. Elimination of imposition of imprisonment for minor violations reduces incarceration orders and gradually alleviates overcrowding and improves detention conditions for serious offenders.
ENFORCEMENT EFFECTIVENESS AND DETERRENCE
Decriminalization’s consequences for regulatory deterrence remain nuanced and complex.
Criminal penalties carry severe consequences such as existence of imprisonment records, professional license revocation, social stigma. The decrease of punishments by replacing the punishment of imprisonment with civil fines might reduce dissuasion if penalties fail to match violation benefits. An entrepreneur who compares regulatory violation costs against non-compliance profits may rationally violate rules if civil penalties prove inadequate. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment and Provisions) Bill aims to address this by automatically indexing the penalties, even though historical amendments remain scarce in this regard, which raises deterrence-adequacy questions for older statutes.
Graduated penalties create appropriate deterrence as the initial warnings for first violations, proportionate fines for subsequent breaches and doubled penalties for repeated violations limits the framework to impose economic consequences while eliminating disproportionate criminal sanctions for technical violations. Research demonstrates that proportionate regulatory penalties achieve equivalent or superior compliance compared to imprisonment-based approaches.
Behavioral research shows that cooperative regulatory approaches enhance voluntary compliance better than purely punitive systems. Businesses receiving improvement notices for initial violations demonstrate higher subsequent compliance rates than criminally prosecuted entities. Decriminalization facilitates trust-based enforcement, building regulatory consensus through collaborative compliance mechanisms rather than adversarial prosecution.
Decriminalization enables administrators to develop proactive compliance support systems, preventive monitoring mechanisms and comprehensive cooperative frameworks. All of this leads to the regulatory authorities shifting from reactive criminal prosecution towards preventive compliance assistance for incidents of violation by employing educational and supportive engagement rather than resorting to ways of imposition of rigorous punishments by the Criminal Courts.
CRIMINAL LAW AND RULE OF LAW TRANSFORMATION
The decriminalization fundamentally reshapes existing legal principles and governance architecture. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment and Provisions) Bill of 2025 highlights proper separation between criminal legal liability with serious harmful conduct and regulatory legal liability which arises from administrative non-compliance. The treatment of regulatory violations as administrative wrongs rather than criminal matters aligns Indian jurisprudence with international best practices where minor breaches attract civil consequences rather than criminal penalties. In addition, the imprisonment of individuals for documentation failures violates proportionality norms, but rather, graduated civil penalties reflecting violation severity embody constitutional principles properly.
Administrative adjudication provides for greater certainty than criminal trials. The officers are designated to follow established evidence rules, witness protocols and employ reasonable decision-making. This administrative process further strengthens the rule of law compared to variable criminal trial procedures.
CONCLUSION
The Jan Vishwas Bill of 2025 aims to completely recalibrate India’s regulatory approach for imposition of punishments from your criminalization towards proportionate, trust-based governance. The decriminalization of 288 provisions carries major changes, reducing judicial caseloads and enabling Courts to focus on serious crimes, enhances the confidence of businesses by ensuring predictability of regulations and leads to increased entrepreneurial participation. Additionally, the criminal jurisprudence clearly distinguishes between serious offenses and administrative violations. The successful implementation of this initiative requires attention to educating officer protocols, clarity on specific imposition of penalties and constant application across sectors. Sophisticated compliance mechanisms must be employed to replace criminal prosecution. If effectively implemented, decriminalization establishes India as a regulatory reform leader, demonstrating that proportionate, cooperative governance produces superior outcomes compared to criminalization-heavy approaches. The legislation fundamentally reshapes India’s regulatory framework, establishing decriminalization principles applicable to state-level legislation and completing India’s transition toward contemporary regulatory governance models.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY: KRISHNA KOUSHIK
