Why Section 106 of the New Criminal Law is Being Called Draconian by Doctors and Truckers Across the Country

The Reasons Behind the Draconian Label Given to Section 106 of the New Criminal Law by Medical Professionals and Truck Drivers All around the United States

According to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which has replaced some parts of the Indian Penal Code, the act of causing death via carelessness is addressed under Section 106. A total of two separate clauses are included.

In the first clause, the maximum punishment for any individual, including medical practitioners, who causes death through a rash or negligent act is increased to five years of imprisonment.

However, the first clause also creates a lower ceiling of two years of imprisonment for the same act when it is committed by a registered medical practitioner during a medical procedure.

offenders who cause death by irresponsible driving and abandon the scene without alerting the police are explicitly targeted by the second clause, which prescribes a maximum sentence of ten years in jail and a significant fine for such offenders.

There were huge demonstrations in response to both sections, first by truck drivers who were opposed to the hit-and-run provision, and then by medical professionals who were opposed to the idea of criminal culpability for medical mistakes. The protests, the replies of the administration, and the present status of these measures are all traced back to the beginning of this page, which breaks into each dispute individually.

Protests by Truck Drivers and the Provision Regarding Hit-and-Run Accidents

Towards the end of December 2023, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita was approved by Parliament. This legislation included a number of amendments, one of which was the introduction of Section 106(2), which required hit-and-run drivers to face severe penalties.

Any individual who causes death by careless driving and then flees without reporting the occurrence to a police officer or magistrate is subject to a maximum sentence of ten years in jail and a fine of seven lakh rupees, as stipulated by this paragraph. Under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, the previous maximum sentence was two years; this was a significant increase from that.

Truck drivers, together with those who operate buses and taxis, began a countrywide strike almost immediately in order to express their disapproval of these contract provisions. It was maintained by organizations such as the All India Motor Transport Congress (AIMTC) that the severe punishment may be abused, which would result in unjust harassment of drivers who really attempted to assist victims but were erroneously accused of leaving.

The strike started at important transport hubs throughout western and northern India, which caused long-distance freight traffic to be disrupted, caused over 2,000 fuel pumps to empty, and caused shortages of basic goods like as vegetables in major marketplaces.

In the first week of January 2024, the demonstrations reached their highest point. Truck drivers brought their complaints to the attention of the general public by parking their cars on national roads, holding meetings with district authorities, and appealing to the public.

Tensions increased in some regions as a result of the perception that local authorities were questioning drivers in a rude manner. In Madhya Pradesh, for instance, the State Collector’s comments on a driver’s “status” forced the Chief Minister of the state to dismiss the official as a response to the fury shown by the protestors.

When the strike continued for an extended period of time, the Home Ministry called for discussions with representatives from the transport sector on January 2. While the provisions of the BNS were being examined in collaboration with various stakeholders, the government gave its word that the hit-and-run section would be put on hold with immediate effect.

As a result of these guarantees, truck drivers eventually ceased their strike, and within a few days, normality was restored to the roadways.

By the middle of the year 2024, the government had legally put Section 106(2) “on hold” in order to conduct a comprehensive study, thereby delaying the implementation of the provision. In addition, the ministry made it clear that it is open to take into consideration any adjustments or clarifications in order to satisfy the genuine concerns of transportation workers.

As of the month of May in the year 2025, there has been no additional action taken to enforce the hit-and-run rule; nonetheless, it is still there in the law books and is awaiting the possibility of being redrafted.

For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )

Protests by Truck Drivers Against Provisions That Allow Hit-and-Run Accidents

At the start of January 2024, truck drivers mounted a series of protests against Section 106(2) of the BNS, which provides a maximum penalty of ten years in jail and a fine of seven lakh rupees against drivers who have caused a fatality and have not disclosed it to the authorities and fled the scene. Some of the features of the demonstrations included road blockages, strikes, and encounters with the police enforcement.

• In the state of Maharashtra, there were demonstrations by the truck drivers called rasta roko across several regions in the state and in one area called Navi Mumbai they fought with the police and people were killed and property destroyed. 

More than 12,000 drivers of private buses in the state of Chhattisgarh went on strike and this was disruptive in the transport system at many towns including Raipur and Bilaspur. 

In West Bengal, protestors blocked National Highway 2 near the Dankuni toll plaza thus causing a vast disruption in the movement of traffic. 

• Commercial vehicles like trucks and buses were banned in the state of Punjab and demonstration was reported on the Ludhiana-Ferozepur Road. Demonstrations occurred in the states of Madhya Pradesh, where there were protests in Bhopal and Indore, this led to the blocking of the state roads and gasoline crisis caused as a result of panic buying.

Discussions that were held between the All India Motor Transport congress (AIMTC) and the Union Home Ministry have made it possible to gain assurances that implementation of Section 106(2) will be shelved until further consultations are made. In light of this, the countrywide strike was decided to be called off.

Protests from Medical Professionals and the Medical Negligence Clause

With the implementation of Section 106(1) of the BNS, the maximum sentence for causing death by carelessness was increased from two years, as stipulated by Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, to five years.

The legislative body, taking into account the specific circumstances surrounding the practice of medicine, enacted a provision that restricts the maximum term of a licensed medical practitioner to a period of two years.

In accordance with the National Medical Commission Act of 2019, the term “registered medical practitioner” has been defined in order to guarantee that this exemption is only applicable to those who are appropriately qualified and registered.

Notwithstanding this exception, a significant number of members of the medical profession believed that any criminal consequence for medical mistakes would be disproportionate. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) argued that physicians are already subject to civil responsibility and professional disciplinary action for clinical negligence, and that the addition of a criminal component will discourage practitioners from making judgments that are essential but dangerous.

A countrywide campaign to oppose the criminal prosecution of physicians was intended to take place between July and August of 2024, according to the announcement made by the IMA in the middle of 2024. They argued that real medical mistakes should be addressed by medical councils rather than criminal courts, and they requested that Section 106(1) be completely removed from the law.

There was a variety of ways that doctors protested. In a number of states, medical faculty members threatened to withhold services, and several hospitals contemplated shutting down in part as a show of solidarity.

Seminars and press conferences were conducted by professional organizations in order to bring attention to situations in which even elementary mistakes in judgment might possibly result in incarceration.

The photographs that spread in Kolkata showed physicians carrying signs that condemned the “gift from the government” that this legislation represented. These images coincided with formal festivities on physicians’ Day, which many participants chose to ignore in order to express their strong opposition to the bill.

In response, the administration made it clear that the maximum two-year sentence for medical practitioners was not a new burden but rather in keeping with the regulations that are already in place under the Indian Penal Code.

It was pointed out by the authorities that Section 304A already permitted a maximum sentence of two years in jail for any anyone, including medical professionals, who caused death via carelessness. They contended that the BNS amendment just maintained this cap for medical cases, despite the fact that the legislation increased the overall maximum for other types of offenders to five years.

Despite this, the medical community advocated for the complete repeal of the law. In late 2024, the Ministry of Health declared that it had received substantial comments from several groups representing physicians and that it would be conducting more evaluations.

A number of officials have proposed the implementation of a requirement that a prima facie medical board recommendation be obtained prior to the commencement of any criminal prosecution. This idea is reminiscent of measures that have been implemented in other countries. As of the month of May in the year 2025, there has been no official modification being adopted; nonetheless, charges under Section 106(1) have been uncommon due to the absence of policy instructions from the federal government.

The Protests of Physicians Against Negligence in Medical Care Allowances for

Concerns have been raised by medical experts over Section 106(1) of the BNS, which says that a person may be sentenced to up to five years in jail for causing death by carelessness, with a maximum of two years for certified medical practitioners who conduct medical treatments.

This clause, according to the Indian Medical Association (IMA) and other medical organizations, has the potential to result in the criminalization of medical mistakes and discourage physicians from carrying out treatments that involve a high level of probability.

The Institute of Medicine (IMA) has declared that it intends to launch a countrywide campaign to oppose the criminal prosecution of medical professionals. The campaign will emphasize the need of adopting a more balanced approach to the issue of medical negligence. 

• Doctors’ Day Boycott: In order to express their disapproval of the new legislation, medical professionals in Kolkata participated in a boycott of official festivities on Doctors’ Day. They also held protests and displayed banners. A clarification has been provided by the government indicating that the two-year jail sentence for medical practitioners is in accordance with the laws that are already in place under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.

The medical community, on the other hand, continues to argue for the total elimination of criminal consequences for medical negligence, and they are looking for a more collaborative approach to resolve their concerns.

Response from the Government and the Present Situation

As a reaction to the demonstrations:Operators of Trucks: The execution of Section 106(2) has been put on hold by the government, and negotiations with various stakeholders have been launched in order to resolve the concerns that have been expressed by the transportation community. 

Despite the fact that no official revisions have been adopted, the government has recognized the concerns of the medical community and is now studying the implementation of procedural protections in order to avoid the exploitation of the legislation.