Jan Vishwas Bill Clears Parliament: Reforming Laws or Reducing Accountability?

Parliament has passed the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill, 2026 , marking one of India’s largest decriminalisation reforms aimed at improving the ease of doing business while reducing criminal penalties for minor offences. Cleared by both Houses through a voice vote , the bill amends 784 provisions across 79 laws under 23 ministries , with 717 provisions decriminalised and 67 aimed at easing compliance and daily governance . The reform also removes over a thousand outdated provisions, signalling a broader attempt to simplify India’s regulatory system.

At its core, the legislation introduces a shift from criminal liability to monetary penalties , ensuring that minor procedural lapses such as delays in filings no longer result in imprisonment. It establishes a system of graded penalties and empowers adjudicating authorities to handle violations, thereby reducing pressure on courts. The government argues that this approach will benefit MSMEs , reduce litigation, and encourage a more efficient regulatory environment based on compliance rather than punishment.

Defending the bill, Union Minister Piyush Goyal said it reflects a move toward trust-based governance , replacing what the government calls a colonial-era system that criminalised even minor infractions. Supporting the reform, BJP MP Tejasvi Surya described it as a historic step that would boost entrepreneurship and align India with global economic practices, arguing that excessive criminalisation had long hindered business growth and innovation.

However, the bill has faced strong criticism from opposition leaders, including Nadimul Haque , K Kavya , Arvind Sawant , and N K Premachandran , who argue that the legislation promotes a “pay-and-escape” model where offenders, especially large corporations, can avoid accountability by paying fines. Critics warn that such an approach could weaken deterrence, encourage repeat violations, and disproportionately favour wealthy entities while undermining fairness in enforcement.

Concerns have been particularly intense regarding sectors affecting public health and safety , such as spurious medicines, food adulteration, and environmental violations. Opposition MPs have argued that replacing imprisonment with financial penalties in such areas could dilute accountability and increase risks to citizens. They have also flagged the absence of clear classification between minor and serious offences, calling the approach a form of blanket decriminalisation that fails to distinguish between technical lapses and harmful violations.

The debate has also raised questions about the role of the judiciary, with critics warning that shifting enforcement to administrative authorities could weaken oversight and transparency. Several opposition members demanded that the bill be sent to a Joint Parliamentary Committee for deeper scrutiny, arguing that such a sweeping reform required more detailed examination.

Ultimately, the Jan Vishwas Bill reflects a broader shift in India’s regulatory philosophy from criminal enforcement to compliance-driven governance. While the government sees it as a necessary reform to boost economic growth and efficiency, the opposition views it as a potential dilution of accountability. The success of this reform will depend on whether it can strike a balance between facilitating business and safeguarding public interest.