The colonial-era law, universally seen as draconian, has come up before the Supreme Court. The Centre has argued that it’s a good law and the only point to ponder is how to prevent its misuse
Defending the colonial-era sedition law, the Centre has told the Supreme Court that the five-judge Constitution Bench verdict in 1962 Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar upholding the validity of IPC Section 124A is a good law and needs no reconsideration.
The Supreme Court is hearing a bunch of petitions seeking scrapping of the law in view of its rampant abuse by the governments with the aim to harass and silence critics.
As many as three Supreme Court benches have also recently underscored the need to review Section 124A.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that instances of abuse of the law would be no justification to re-examine the law reconsideration.
The remedy lies in preventing such abuse on a case-to-case basis rather than doubting a long-standing settled law declared by a constitution bench for about six decades, the SG argued.
The 1962 verdict had upheld the constitutional validity of Section 124A from the perspective of all constitutional principles, including the test of Article 14, 19 and 21, contained in Part III of the constitution, Mehta submitted before a three-judge bench.
A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana and comprising Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli will hear arguments on May 10 on the legal question of whether the pleas challenging the sedition law be referred to a larger bench for reconsidering the 1962 verdict.
Crime and punishment
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which is commonly referred to as the sedition law, defines sedition as an offence committed when “any person 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”.
Disaffection includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity
Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures and administrative or other actions of the government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section
It is a non-bailable offence and punishment ranges from three- year imprisonment to life sentence and/or fine
COLONIAL HISTORY
Drafting of sedition law
The crime of sedition first found mention in the draft Indian Penal Code of 1837, which provided that anyone , through his/her speech or writing, attempts to “excite feelings of disaffection” towards the government in the territories of the East India Company would be punished with banishment for life or three-year jail sentence.
The draft code became a law in 1860, after the 1857 war of Independence, but the clause related to sedition was included 10 years later by the insertion of Section 124A in the IPC.
Used against freedom struggle stalwarts
In 1897, Bal Gangadhar Tilak became the first political personality to be persecuted under the sedition law for his writing and speeches.
Mahatma Gandhi was tried under Section 124A in 1922; Bhagat Singh, Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and many others also faces sedition charge and remained defiant.