#Coronavirus: False Relief Demand Will Land You In Jail; Tea Won’t Cure Coronavirus (Mythbusters)
On Tuesday, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) invoked the Disaster Management Act, 2005, to effectively implement social distancing measures to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 in the country.
How Did This Happen?
Basically this order was issued under Section 10 (2)(l) of the Disaster Management Act.
Which directs ministries/ departments of the Government of India, state/union territory governments and state/ union territory authorities to take effective measures and will be in force in all parts of the country, for 21 days with effect from March 25.
Further the Act was invoked soon after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a first-of-its-kind three-week lockdown of the country to fight the coronavirus outbreak that has claimed 10 lives and infected 536 people in India.
What Is Section 51 to 60 Act?
There will be penalties for specific offences, according to sections 51 to 60 of the act.
According to that, anyone found obstructing any officer or employee from performing duty will be imprisoned for a term which may extend to one year or fined, or be both.
Further, if such obstruction or refusal to comply with directions results in loss of lives or imminent danger thereof, the person shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend up to two years.
Also, these sections will be invoked to punish those making false claims, indulging in misappropriation of money or materials. “One found guilty can be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, and also with fine.”
A spokesperson from the Ministry of Home Affairs has recently tweeted about informing the same.
As per the tweet, for issuing false warnings, there could be imprisonment for a year or fines.
Not only this, there have been tweets about the fake news circulations about the spread of COVID-19.
What If There Has Been An Offence By The Department Of The Government?
If there is an offence by ‘Departments of the Government’, the head of the department shall be deemed guilty and liable to be punished accordingly unless he proves that the incident happened without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.
Also, if it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any officer, other than the head of the department, “such officer shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.”
In case of failure of an officer in duty or his connivance at the contravention of the provisions of this Act would mean “imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine” under Section 65 of the Act.
Also, those committing offences under the category of “Offence by companies” shall face punishment accordingly.
Further, no court shall take cognisance of an offence committed under this Act, except on a complaint made by “the national authority, the state authority, the central government, the state government, the district authority or any other authority or officer authorised in this behalf by that authority or government, as the case may be” or “any person who has given notice of not less than thirty days in the manner prescribed, of the alleged offence and his intention to make a complaint to the national authority, the state authority, the central government, the state government, the district authority or any other authority or officer authorised.”
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.