NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to clarify its stand on pending and future sedition cases till such time the Centre re-examines the validity of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The bench gave the Centre a day to respond.
“We will take into consideration the government has taken cognisance of the issue and is reconsidering the law,” said the bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the government will examine the provision and the hearing should be deferred till then.
He argued the reconsideration will be at the level of the executive because it involves the sovereignty and integrity of the nation.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, said people are being arrested because of this provision and this would not be right for them.
“The Constitution does not say this... It is for the judiciary to consider whether something is constitutional or not,” he said, adding Jawaharlal Nehru had called 124A obnoxious.
The bench, also comprising judges Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, asked how the misuse of the provision will be dealt at the ground level as local police operates it the most.
The Supreme Court is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the sedition law.
The court, however, expressed concern over the continuous abuse of the provision and even suggested that guidelines may be issued to stop the abuse or a decision to keep the sedition law in abeyance till the review exercise is completed.
The Centre's affidavit had said it has decided to "re-examine and re-consider" the sedition law by an "appropriate forum", in a change of stance just two days after stoutly defending this law, and also urged the Supreme Court not to "invest time" in examining its validity once again.
The top court, which was to decide whether a three or five-judge bench should hear the batch of pleas challenging the validity of the sedition law, took note of the fresh stand of the government.
Quoting the latest affidavit, which also referred to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's views on issues like shedding of colonial baggage", protection of civil liberties, and respect of human rights, a bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana said, "What we feel is that the State has said they want to do something. We should not be unreasonable".
The bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, said "our specific query is on two issues. One is about the pending cases and the second is, how the government will take care of future cases till the reconsideration. These are the two issues. Nothing else."
The bench asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to apprise the court of the Centre's stand on Wednesday when it may pass some orders.
The sedition law has been under intense public scrutiny in the recent years over its alleged misuse by authorities.
Referring to the possible "misuse" of the provision, the bench said even the attorney general had said as to how the law was invoked even for chanting 'Hanuman Chalisa' and asked the Centre to come up with some response.
"We are making it very clear. We want instructions. We will give you time till tomorrow. Our specific queries are: one about pending cases and the second, as to how the government will take care of future cases."
Mehta said the filing of FIR and the investigations are done by the states and the Centre has no role in them, and that there are constitutional courts for granting remedies against any misuse of the provision based on the facts of each case.
"We cannot ask everyone to go and attend the courts and be in jail for months. When the government itself has shown concerns about misuse then how will you protect them? We have to balance. There are people who are jailed and people who are going to be booked. Please make your stand clear on this," the bench said.
A total 356 cases of sedition--as defined under Section 124A of IPC--were registered and 548 persons arrested between 2015 and 2020, according to data compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).
However, just 12 persons arrested in seven sedition cases were convicted in this six-year period.
The bench also asked how much time the government will take in reconsidering the sedition law.
To this, the solicitor general said he cannot give the accurate time, but the process has been initiated and from "the tenor and spirit of the affidavit", it was evident that there was an application of mind involved in the process.
"You have used the word 'competent forum' and will re-examine it. Why not the Central government through its ministry issue a direction to the states that the matters under Section 124A (sedition) of the IPC be kept in abeyance till the issue is under reconsideration," the bench said.
The law officer said such an order has not been passed by the apex court in the history of this country directing that a penal provision be not used.
"We are not talking about all provisions. Section 124A only," the bench responded.
The bench said that even in the 1962 judgement in the Kedar Nath Singh case, which had upheld the validity of the sedition law, the provision was "melted down" but at ground level local police are operating.
"Unless you issue a direction that you are reconsidering the provision and no cases be registered. They will not act."
Meanwhile, a total of 326 cases were registered in the country under the controversial colonial era law of sedition between 2014 and 2019 in which just six persons were convicted.
According to the Union Home Ministry data, a total of 326 cases were registered under the sedition law -- the highest, 54, in Assam -- between 2014 and 2019.
Out of the cases registered, chargesheets were filed in 141 cases while only six people were convicted for the offence in six years of the period discussed in the data, officials said.
In Assam, out of the 54 sedition cases registered, chargesheets were filed in 26 cases and trials were completed in 25 cases.
However, not a single case led to conviction between 2014 and 2019, the data says.
Jharkhand registered 40 cases under the Section 124 (A) during the six years, out of which chargesheets were filed in 29 cases, and trials were completed in 16 cases.
Only one person was convicted out of all these cases filed in the state.
In Haryana, 31 cases were registered under the sedition law with chargesheets filed in 19 cases, and trials completed in six cases.
Here too, only one person was convicted.
Bihar, Jammu and Kashmir, and Kerala registered an equal number of cases, 25, under the sedition law.
While Bihar and Kerala could not file chargesheet in any of the cases, Jammu and Kashmir filed it in three cases.
However, no such case registered in the three states between 2014 and 2019 led to conviction.
Twenty-two sedition cases were filed in Karnataka with chargesheets filed in 17 cases, but trial could be completed in only one case.
The state too had zero conviction under sedition law in six years.
Seventeen sedition cases were filed in Uttar Pradesh and eight in West Bengal between 2014 and 2019.
While chargesheets were filed in eight cases in UP and in five cases in West Bengal, no one was convicted in the two states.
In Delhi, four sedition cases were registered between 2014 and 2019, no chargesheet has been filed in any case, nor has anyone been convicted.
No sedition case was filed in Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura, Sikkim, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Puducherry, Chandigarh, Daman and Diu, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli in the six-year period.
One sedition case each was filed in Maharashtra (in 2015), Punjab (2015), and Uttarakhand (2017).
According to the home ministry data, 2019 saw the highest, 93, sedition cases registered in the country.
In 2018, there were filed 70 such cases, followed by 51 in 2017, 47 in 2014, 35 in 2016, and 30 in 2015.
Four chargesheets were filed in the country in 2019 under the sedition law, 38 in 2018, 27 in 2017, 16 in 2016, 14 in 2014, and six in 2015.
Among the six convicted, two got the sentence in 2018 and one each in 2019, 2017, 2016, and 2014.
The Centre Monday told the Supreme Court not to invest time in examining the validity of sedition law as it has decided to go for re-consideration of the provisions by a competent forum.
The Centre also said it was cognisant of various views, and concerns about civil liberties while being committed to protecting the sovereignty and integrity of this great nation.
The Ministry of Home Affairs, in an affidavit, referred to the views of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on shedding the colonial baggage and said he has been in favour of the protection of civil liberties and respect of human rights, and in that spirit, has scrapped over 1,500 outdated laws and over 25,000 compliance burdens.
On July 15, 2021, concerned over "enormous misuse" of the colonial era penal law on sedition, the Supreme Court had asked the Centre why it was not repealing the provision used by the British to "silence" people like Mahatma Gandhi to suppress freedom movement.
Agreeing to examine the pleas filed by the Editors Guild of India and a former major general, challenging the constitutionality of Section 124A (sedition) in the IPC, a bench headed by the then Chief Justice N V Ramana had said its main concern was the "misuse of law" leading to rise in number of cases.
The non-bailable provision makes any speech or expression that brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India a criminal offence punishable with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
(With PTI Inputs)