The Apex court last year had asked the Centre why it was not repealing the colonial-era law used by the British to silence people like Mahatma Gandhi to suppress the freedom movement, as it expressed concern over the misuse of the provision
A Supreme Court bench is scheduled to hear on Wednesday a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the sedition law.
The Apex court last year had asked the Centre why it was not repealing the provision used by the British to silence people like Mahatma Gandhi to suppress the freedom movement as it expressed concern over the misuse of the colonial-era penal law.
A three-judge bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli of the Supreme Court will hear the petitions challenging the Constitutionality of Section 124A (sedition) in the IPC.
The top court had also agreed to examine the pleas filed by the Editors Guild of India and a former Major-General S G Vombatkere, saying that its main concern was the “misuse of law” leading to a rise in the number of cases.
In April 2021, another bench led by Justice UU Lalit had issued notice on a petition filed by two journalists challenging Section 124A IPC. A petition filed by journalists Patricia Mukhim and Anuradha Bhasin on the same issue are also pending.
According to News18, which cites data from the National Crime Records Bureau, the number of such cases rose by 160 per cent to 93 between 2016 and 2019. But in 2019, the conviction rate in such cases was a mere 3.3 per cent, which means just two of the accused were convicted.
What is the sedition law?
Section 124A IPC states: “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which a fine may be added; or, with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which a fine may be added; or, with fine.”
Introduced by the British in 1870, the sedition law was almost dropped from the Constitution in 1948 after discussions of the Constituent Assembly.
The word “sedition” disappeared from the Constitution on November 26, 1949 and Article 19 (1)(a) gave absolute freedom of speech and expression. However, Section 124A continued to stay in IPC.
According to News18, in 1951, Jawaharlal Nehru brought in the first amendment of the Constitution to limit the freedom under Article 19(1)(a) and enacted Article 19(2) to empower the State to put curbs in the form of “reasonable restrictions” on the right to free speech.
In its judgment in the Kedar Nath case in 1962, a Constitution bench upheld the validity of the sedition law under IPC and also defined the scope of it. It held that Section 124A only penalised words that reveal an intent or tendency to disturb law and order or that seem to incite violence. This definition has been taken as precedent for all matters pertaining to section 124A ever since.
What have the courts said?
Section 124A of the IPC has been challenged in various courts in specific cases.
That judgment in the Kedar Nath case went into the issue of whether the law on sedition is consistent with the fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (a) which guarantees each citizen’s freedom of speech and expression.
The Supreme Court laid down that every citizen has a right to say or write about the government, by way of criticism or comment, as long as it does not “incite people to violence” against the government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder.
The Maharashtra government in 2015 issued a circular to its police personnel before invoking sedition.
According to the Indian Express, the 2015 circular came during the hearing of a PIL in the Bombay High Court, after cartoonist Aseem Trivedi was booked for sedition.
The police had claimed that Trivedi had defamed the Parliament and the Constitution through his cartoons during the anti-corruption protests by Anna Hazare in 2012.
Even though the sedition charge was subsequently dropped by the police, a PIL was filed in 2015 on the alleged “arbitrary” application of the charge.
The Bombay High Court in 2015 referred to the Kedarnath judgment and said there was a need to lay down parameters for the invocation of Section 124A.
“Otherwise a situation would result in which an unrestricted recourse to Section 124A would result in a serious encroachment of guarantee of personal liberty conferred upon every citizen of a free society,” the court had said, as reported by the Indian Express.
The Supreme Court clarified on September 5, 2016, that sedition charges cannot be brought against a person merely for raising his voice against the government or its policies.
In September, 2019, Supreme Court judge Deepak Gupta had observed,”The manner in which the provisions of Section 124A are being misused, begs the question as to whether we should have a re-look at it.”
“The law of sedition is more often abused and misused. The people who criticise those in power are arrested by police officials on the asking of those in power, even if a person may get bail the next day from court,” he said.
In July 2021, while issuing notice on the petitions, the CJI had made critical remarks against the provision.
“Is it still necessary to retain this colonial law which the British used to suppress Gandhi, Tilak etc., even after 75 years of independence?” the CJI had asked the Attorney General of India.
“If you see history of charging this section, conviction rate is very low. The enormous power of misuse of this section can be compared with a carpenter given a saw. Instead of cutting a tree, he cuts the entire forest,” the CJI had then observed.
Some sedition cases
JNUSU leader Kanhaiya Kumar faced sedition charges for allegedly shouting anti-India slogans during a controversial event on parliament attack convict Afzal Guru.
In October 2018, Gujarat crime branch filed chargesheet against then patidar quota stir leader Hardik Patel and his five associates and accused them of sedition.
In 2003, Rajasthan govt slapped sedition charges on VHP leader Praveen Togadia after he defied a state ban distributing tridents to Bajrang Dal members.
SAD leader Simranjit Singh Mann was charged with four different cases of sedition for raising pro-Khalistan slogans on June 6, 2005 in the golden temple complex.
Last year, the Uttar Pradesh police slapped sedition charges against former UP Governor Aziz Qureshi for his alleged derogatory remarks against CM Yogi Adityanath-led government.
With inputs from agencies
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News,
India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.