National Security Laws in India

References

[1] Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958.

[2] Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1990 (Jammu and Kashmir).

[3] Constitution of India, 1950.

[4] Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (as amended up to 2019).

[5] National Security Act, 1980.

[6] Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

[7] Information Technology Act, 2000 (as amended by IT Amendment Act, 2008).

[8] Official Secrets Act, 1923.

[9] National Investigation Agency Act, 2008.

[10] Preventive Detention Act, 1950.

[11] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

[12] Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[13] Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985.

[14] Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002.

[15] Rowlatt Act (Indian Criminal Law (Emergency Powers) Act), 1919.

[16] A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.

[17] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.

[18] Inderjit Barua v. State of Assam, AIR 1983 Gau 55.

[19] Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569.

[20] People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 301.

[21] D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610.

[22] Naga People's Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1998 SC 431.

[23] Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1.

[24] Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) v. Union of India, (2016) 14 SCC 536.

[25] Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.

[26] Romila Thapar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 753.

[27] Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb, (2021) 3 SCC 713.

[28] Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (2022) SCC Online SC 929.

[29] Report of the Committee to Review the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy Committee), Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India (2005).

[30] Second Administrative Reforms Commission, Combating Terrorism: Protecting by Righteousness, 8th Report, Government of India (2007).

[31] National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Prison Statistics India (Annual Reports).

[32] National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Annual Reports and Communications to the Government of India.

[33] Hunter Commission Report (Report of the Disorders Inquiry Committee), 1920.

[34] UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on India, ICCPR, CCPR/C/IND/CO/4 (2017).

[35] UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Report on the Mission to India, A/HRC/22/53/Add.1 (2013).

[36] Amnesty International, "Denied: Failures in Accountability for Human Rights Violations by Security Force Personnel in Jammu and Kashmir" (2015).

[37] Human Rights Watch, "Getting Away with Murder: 50 Years of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act" (2008).

[38] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 — ratified by India in 1979.

[39] V. Venkatesh, "AFSPA: A Historical and Legal Analysis", NUJS Law Review, Vol. 4 (2011).

[40] Ujjwal Kumar Singh, The State, Democracy and Anti-Terror Laws in India, Sage Publications (2007).

[41] Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal, "AFSPA: Legacy and Implications", Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 47, No. 38 (2012).

[42] Navnita Chadha Behera, Demystifying Kashmir, Brookings Institution Press (2006).

[43] Sanjib Baruah, Durable Disorder: Understanding the Politics of Northeast India, Oxford University Press (2005).

@article{1717795,
      author = {Yash Bhardwaj},
      title = {National Security Laws in India},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {9},
      number = {11},
      pages = {1353-1360},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1717795.pdf},
      abstract = {National security legislation often creates a delicate balance between governmental authority and personal freedoms. In India, this tension is particularly evident through a combination of colonial-era and post-independence laws that regulate armed conflicts and insurgencies. This study focuses on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA), exploring its roots in colonial rule, key operational clauses, and the important constitutional and human rights issues it presents.  It reviews the development of court rulings—from the relatively lenient approach in Naga People's Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India (1998) to the stronger emphasis on accountability in EEVFAM v. Union of India (2016)—as a dynamic body of legal thought.  The analysis suggests that necessary changes are required by constitutional principles and can be implemented effectively while maintaining essential security goals.},
      month = {May},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I11-1717795}
  }