COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TERRORIST ACT DEFINITIONS UNDER THE BHARATIYA NYAY SANHITA (BNS), THE UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT (UAPA), AND THE CHHATTISGARH SPECIAL PUBLIC SECURITY ACT (CGSPSA)
AUTHOR – P. VEENA SWAMI, (RESEARCH SCHOLAR), J. YOGANANDAM CG COLLEGE RAIPUR
BEST CITATION – P. VEENA SWAMI, COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TERRORIST ACT DEFINITIONS UNDER THE BHARATIYA NYAY SANHITA (BNS), THE UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT (UAPA), AND THE CHHATTISGARH SPECIAL PUBLIC SECURITY ACT (CGSPSA), INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (1) OF 2026, PG. 419-422, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.
Abstract
The definition of “terrorist act” forms the backbone of counter-terrorism legislation, shaping the scope of criminal liability, investigative powers, and judicial interpretation. India’s counter-terrorism framework is not governed by a single statute but by a combination of central and state legislations, each addressing internal security concerns from distinct perspectives. The recent enactment of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), replacing the Indian Penal Code, has reintroduced terrorism-related offences within the general criminal law framework, alongside the existing Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), and state-specific legislations such as the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005 (CGSPSA).
This paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the definitions of “terrorist act” and related unlawful activities under these three legislations. It critically examines the conceptual scope, constituent elements, intent requirements, and consequences attached to such definitions. The study highlights overlaps, divergences, and ambiguities among the statutes, particularly in relation to civil liberties, federal balance, and proportionality. By analyzing judicial interpretations and legislative intent, the paper argues that while these laws aim to safeguard national security, the absence of definitional clarity and uniform standards risks misuse and over-criminalization. The study concludes by recommending harmonization, clearer statutory thresholds, and stronger safeguards to balance security imperatives with constitutional rights.
Keywords: Terrorism; Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita; UAPA; CGSPSA; National security; Criminal law; Civil liberties