Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 – Decriminalisation of 79 Laws & 784 Provisions

Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 – Decriminalisation at Scale:  79 Central Acts amended  &  784 provisions rationalised- Passed by Lok Sabha on 1 April 2026  |  Bill No. 104-C of 2026

I. The Jan Vishwas Act, 2023 — The Foundation

The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 marked a decisive shift in India’s approach to regulatory enforcement. For decades, Indian statute books carried a large volume of provisions that treated routine non-compliances — missed filings, procedural lapses, minor labelling errors — as criminal offences, subjecting individuals and businesses to the full weight of criminal prosecution, police action, and imprisonment. The mismatch between the gravity of such offences and the criminal law response had long been a source of concern for ease of doing business.

The 2023 Act addressed this directly. It amended 183 provisions across 42 Central Acts, converting criminal penalties into civil monetary penalties, removing imprisonment for purely regulatory defaults, and introducing a structured adjudication mechanism: an empowered officer to inquire, impose penalty, and — separately — an appellate authority to hear grievances. The underlying philosophy was clear: the criminal justice system — police, courts, prosecution — should not be the default response to what are essentially regulatory non-compliances by businesses and individuals.

A further feature of the 2023 Act was the automatic fine revision clause embedded in section 3: fines and penalties prescribed under the amended enactments would increase by 10% of the minimum amount every three years from the date of commencement. The rationale was equally pragmatic — to prevent monetary penalties from becoming commercially irrelevant with the passage of time, without requiring Parliament to revisit each Act individually. This clause, however, operated as a default: where an amended enactment already contained its own mechanism for revision of fines, the Act’s own provision would prevail over the general 10% rule.

II. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 — The Next Step

The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 (Bill No. 104-C of 2026, passed by Lok Sabha on 1 April 2026) continues this legislative journey, substantially extending its reach. Where the 2023 Act covered 42 Acts and 183 provisions, the 2026 Act amends 79 Central Acts across 784 provisions — a nearly fourfold expansion in scope. The amendments span enactments from 1870 to 2025, cutting across virtually every sector of the Indian economy: infrastructure, banking, agriculture, shipping, healthcare, mining, insurance, labour, intellectual property, and urban governance.

The operative framework of the 2026 Act mirrors its predecessor. Section 2 gives effect to the amendments listed in the Schedule. Section 3 re-enacts the 10% triennial fine escalation — subject to the same qualification that enactments with their own revision mechanisms are not overridden. Section 4 preserves existing rights, liabilities, and proceedings. Section 5 confers on the Central Government a limited two-year power to remove difficulties by notification.

III.  Key Features of the 2026 Amendments

The dominant pattern across all 79 Acts is decriminalisation through a consistent set of legislative techniques:

An important structural feature worth noting: the 2026 Act amends the Jan Vishwas Act, 2023 itself (at Schedule item 77). A proviso is inserted after section 3 of the 2023 Act, clarifying that where any enactment in the Schedule already provides its own mechanism for revision of fines and penalties, only that enactment-specific provision shall apply. This is a housekeeping amendment — preventing a conflict between the general 10% escalation rule and the self-contained revision mechanisms of specific statutes — but it is a technically significant one that practitioners advising clients on applicable penalty quantum must bear in mind.

IV. The Complete Schedule — 79 Central Acts Amended

The following table sets out all 79 Central Acts amended (excluding the self-referential amendment to the Jan Vishwas Act, 2023 which the government treats separately), with a one-line summary of the core change effected in each enactment:

V. Sectoral Highlights

Financial Sector

The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, and the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 2013 all see imprisonment removed for regulatory defaults, with enhanced civil penalties and officer-based adjudication substituted. This aligns the enforcement architecture of these statutes with the graduated regulatory approach already adopted in SEBI and IRDAI frameworks. The “stigma” of a criminal case for a late filing or a technical RBI notification lapse disappears. This directly improves “Ease of Doing Business.”
Note: While the Bill removes imprisonment for regulatory defaults, it does not remove criminal liability for serious fraud, embezzlement, or misappropriation of funds. Those remain punishable under the general criminal law of the land.

Infrastructure and Transport

The Electricity Act, 2003 sees a nuanced change — negligent damage to electrical works is decriminalised to civil penalty, while wilful damage retains criminal liability. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 removes criminal liability for administrative licensing defaults. The Railways Act, 1989 and the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 likewise move to civil penalty regimes.

Shipping and Ports

A cluster of recent enactments — the Coastal Shipping Act, 2025, the Merchant Shipping Act, 2025, the Indian Ports Act, 2025, the Major Port Authorities Act, 2021, the Marine Aids to Navigation Act, 2021, and the Recycling of Ships Act, 2019 — are all brought within the decriminalisation framework. The Indian Ports Act gets a new compounding-of-offences provision.

Insolvency Practitioners’ Note: Coal Mines PF and Seamen’s PF

A necessary clarification at the outset: the 2026 Bill amends the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 and the Seamen’s Provident Fund Act, 1966 — both sector-specific, standalone statutes governing provident fund obligations in the coal mining and maritime industries respectively. The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (the principal EPFO statute) is not amended by the 2026 Bill. That statute already operates through a robust quasi-judicial framework — Section 7A confers power on an officer to determine dues, making the EPFO’s recovery mechanism substantially administrative in character even before these amendments. The observations below are therefore confined to insolvency proceedings involving Corporate Debtors in the coal mining and maritime sectors.

Under both Acts, prior to the 2026 amendments, defaults in provident fund contributions carried criminal liability enforceable through criminal courts. For a Corporate Debtor in CIRP or liquidation, this created a structural deadlock: criminal proceedings against the company or its officers could not be resolved within an insolvency timeline, and could not be extinguished by a Resolution Plan in the manner that civil debt is. Resolution Professionals in these sectors often faced the “Sword of Damocles” of pending criminal proceedings running parallel to the CIRP, complicating the finality and clean exit that a Resolution Plan is designed to deliver.

By converting these defaults into civil monetary penalties adjudicated by a designated officer, the 2026 Act removes that deadlock. The consequences are practical and direct. The penalty quantum can be determined through the administrative adjudication process and admitted as a claim within the CIRP, without waiting for a criminal court verdict. The liability, now civil in character, can be addressed within the Resolution Plan and ranks within the waterfall under Section 53 of the IBC during liquidation. The clean exit that resolution applicants seek is no longer clouded by the spectre of unconcluded criminal proceedings specific to these sector-specific PF statutes.

In sectors such as coal mining and maritime operations, where provident fund arrears at a stressed company can be substantial, this is a meaningful change. It is as much an acceleration of insolvency resolution in these sectors as it is a decriminalisation measure.

Real Estate (RERA)

The amendment to section 68 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 carries implications that extend well beyond the Central Act itself, and practitioners advising in the real estate sector must read it in its full constitutional and federal context.

Section 68 previously constituted the “charging section” for the offence of non-compliance with RERA orders. Because most State RERA frameworks are built directly upon the Central Act, an amendment to this charging section alters the fundamental nature of the violation across all States simultaneously. The Central Act’s shift from criminal prosecution to civil adjudication is therefore not merely a Central Government reform — it ripples through every State RERA regime.

The constitutional basis for this is Article 254. Real estate transactions and property regulation fall within the Concurrent List. Where a State law is repugnant to a Central law on a Concurrent List subject, the Central law prevails. The decriminalised version enacted by Parliament is therefore now the law of the land for all States, regardless of what their State RERA Rules may currently provide. State governments will be required to update their State RERA Rules to align with the revised adjudication procedure mandated by the Central Act. The Bill empowers State Governments to notify the rank and designation of the Adjudicating Officers who will conduct penalty inquiries — so, for instance, MahaRERA (Maharashtra) will notify specific officers for this purpose rather than referring matters to a Magistrate.

For homebuyers and developers, the practical significance is this: enforcement of RERA orders will move from the criminal court to an administrative adjudicating officer, making the process faster and more accessible. For practitioners handling RERA matters, the transition period — between commencement of the amendment and State-level notification of adjudicating officers — will need careful navigation to avoid procedural gaps in enforcement.

Do Pending Criminal Prosecutions Survive?

Section 4 of the Act preserves the validity of existing rights, liabilities, obligations, and proceedings. Strictly construed, pending criminal prosecutions initiated under the pre-amendment provisions therefore “survive” commencement. The savings clause is unambiguous on this point.

However, legal survival and practical continuance are two different things. The introduction of a civil penalty regime creates a powerful structural incentive for the State to allow compounding and settlement rather than press on with criminal prosecution. Courts are increasingly disinclined to pursue custodial outcomes for conduct that the legislature has, by amendment, reclassified as no longer warranting criminal treatment. The legislative intent expressed through the amendment is itself a relevant consideration in sentencing, bail, and discharge proceedings.

For practitioners, the commencement of the 2026 Act opens two tactical avenues in pending matters. First, it provides a strong ground for a discharge application: if Parliament has legislatively determined that the conduct in question no longer merits criminal sanction, that determination is directly relevant to whether continuing prosecution serves any legitimate purpose. Second, it creates a credible framework for pushing an accused client toward settlement under the new civil adjudication mechanism, achieving a quicker and more commercially certain resolution than the criminal track offers. Both avenues must of course be assessed against the specific facts, the stage of proceedings, and the precise amendment applicable to the enactment in question.

VI. Commencement — A Practitioner’s Caution

Section 1(2) of the Act provides that it shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint, and different dates may be appointed for amendments relating to different enactments. This is not a simultaneous commencement — the 79 Acts may be notified in tranches.

Practitioners advising clients, or handling matters under any of these enactments, must therefore monitor the Official Gazette for commencement notifications specific to each Act. Until commencement of the amendment to a given enactment, the pre-existing penal provisions continue to apply. This is particularly relevant for ongoing prosecutions, pending adjudication proceedings, and advisory opinions on penalty exposure.

VII.  Conclusion

The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 is the most extensive single decriminalisation exercise in independent India’s legislative history, measured by the number of provisions rationalised. Its significance lies not merely in the numbers but in the consistent application of a principle: that regulatory compliance should be enforced through proportionate civil mechanisms, with criminal law reserved for conduct that is wilful, fraudulent, or causes genuine harm.

For businesses, this reduces the spectre of criminal prosecution for procedural lapses. For regulators, it creates a more tractable enforcement pathway. For the justice system, it reduces the burden of regulatory prosecutions that properly belong before adjudicating officers. For practitioners, it requires close attention to commencement notifications and the sector-specific contours of each amendment.

The journey that the Jan Vishwas Act, 2023 began — of rewriting India’s regulatory penal architecture — has now taken a significantly larger step forward.

******